This statistic shows the 25 largest counties in the United States in 2022, by population. In 2022, about 9.72 million people were estimated to be living in Los Angeles County, California.

Additional information on urbanization in the United States

Urbanization is defined as the process by which cities grow or by which societies become more urban. Rural to urban migration in the United States, and around the world, is often undertaken in the search for employment or to enjoy greater access to services such as healthcare. The largest cities in the United States are steadily growing. Given their size, incremental increases yield considerable numerical gains as seen by New York increasing by 69,777 people in 2011, the most of any city. However in terms of percentage growth, smaller cities outside the main centers are growing the fastest, such as Georgetown city and Leander city in Texas.

Urbanization has increased slowly in the United States, rising from 80.77 percent of the population living in urban areas in 2010 to 82.66 percent in 2020. In 2018, the United States ranked 14th in a ranking of countries based on their degree of urbanization. Unlike fully urbanized countries such as Singapore and Hong Kong, the United States maintains a sizeable agricultural industry. Although technological developments have reduced demands for rural labor, labor in the industry and supporting services are still required.

Chart and table of population level and growth rate for the state of California from 1900 to 2024.

The Census Bureau released revised delineations for urban areas on December 29, 2022. The new criteria (contained in this Federal Register Notice) is based primarily on housing unit density measured at the census block level. The minimum qualifying threshold for inclusion as an urban area is an area that contains at least 2,000 housing units or has a population of at least 5,000 persons. It also eliminates the classification of areas as “urban clusters/urbanized areas”. This represents a change from 2010, where urban areas were defined as areas consisting of 50,000 people or more and urban clusters consisted of at least 2,500 people but less than 50,000 people with at least 1,500 people living outside of group quarters. Due to the new population thresholds for urban areas, 36 urban clusters in California are no longer considered urban areas, leaving California with 193 urban areas after the new criteria was implemented.

The State of California experienced an increase of 1,885,884 in the total urban population, or 5.3%. However, the total urban area population as a percentage of the California total population went down from 95% to 94.2%. For more information about the mapped data, download the Excel spreadsheet here.

Please note that some of the 2020 urban areas have different names or additional place names as a result of the inclusion of housing unit counts as secondary naming criteria.

Please note there are four urban areas that cross state boundaries in Arizona and Nevada. For 2010, only the parts within California are displayed on the map; however, the population and housing estimates represent the entirety of the urban areas. For 2020, the population and housing unit estimates pertains to the areas within California only.

Data for this web application was derived from the 2010 and 2020 Censuses (2010 and 2020 Census Blocks, 2020 Urban Areas, and Counties) and the 2016-2020 American Community Survey (2010 -Urban Areas) and can be found at data.census.gov.

For more information about the urban area delineations, visit the Census Bureau's Urban and Rural webpage and FAQ.

To view more data from the State of California Department of Finance, visit the Demographic Research Unit Data Hub.

ECM Community Support Services tables for a Quarterly Implementation Report. Including the County and Plan Details for both ECM and Community Support.

This Medi-Cal Enhanced Care Management (ECM) and Community Supports Calendar Year Quarterly Implementation Report provides a comprehensive overview of ECM and Community Supports implementation in the programs' first year. It includes data at the state, county, and plan levels on total members served, utilization, and provider networks.

ECM is a statewide MCP benefit that provides person-centered, community-based care management to the highest need members. The Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) and its MCP partners began implementing ECM in phases by Populations of Focus (POFs), with the first three POFs launching statewide in CY 2022.

Community Supports are services that address members’ health-related social needs and help them avoid higher, costlier levels of care. Although it is optional for MCPs to offer these services, every Medi-Cal MCP offered Community Supports in 2022, and at least two Community Supports services were offered and available in every county by the end of the year.

20 year Projected Urban Growth scenarios. Base year is 2000. Projected year in this dataset is 2020.

By 2020, most forecasters agree, California will be home to between 43 and 46 million residents-up from 35 million today. Beyond 2020 the size of California's population is less certain. Depending on the composition of the population, and future fertility and migration rates, California's 2050 population could be as little as 50 million or as much as 70 million. One hundred years from now, if present trends continue, California could conceivably have as many as 90 million residents.

Where these future residents will live and work is unclear. For most of the 20th Century, two-thirds of Californians have lived south of the Tehachapi Mountains and west of the San Jacinto Mountains-in that part of the state commonly referred to as Southern California. Yet most of coastal Southern California is already highly urbanized, and there is relatively little vacant land available for new development. More recently, slow-growth policies in Northern California and declining developable land supplies in Southern California are squeezing ever more of the state's population growth into the San Joaquin Valley.

How future Californians will occupy the landscape is also unclear. Over the last fifty years, the state's population has grown increasingly urban. Today, nearly 95 percent of Californians live in metropolitan areas, mostly at densities less than ten persons per acre. Recent growth patterns have strongly favored locations near freeways, most of which where built in the 1950s and 1960s. With few new freeways on the planning horizon, how will California's future growth organize itself in space? By national standards, California's large urban areas are already reasonably dense, and economic theory suggests that densities should increase further as California's urban regions continue to grow. In practice, densities have been rising in some urban counties, but falling in others.

These are important issues as California plans its long-term future. Will California have enough land of the appropriate types and in the right locations to accommodate its projected population growth? Will future population growth consume ever-greater amounts of irreplaceable resource lands and habitat? Will jobs continue decentralizing, pushing out the boundaries of metropolitan areas? Will development densities be sufficient to support mass transit, or will future Californians be stuck in perpetual gridlock? Will urban and resort and recreational growth in the Sierra Nevada and Trinity Mountain regions lead to the over-fragmentation of precious natural habitat? How much water will be needed by California's future industries, farms, and residents, and where will that water be stored? Where should future highway, transit, and high-speed rail facilities and rights-of-way be located? Most of all, how much will all this growth cost, both economically, and in terms of changes in California's quality of life?

Clearly, the more precise our current understanding of how and where California is likely to grow, the sooner and more inexpensively appropriate lands can be acquired for purposes of conservation, recreation, and future facility siting. Similarly, the more clearly future urbanization patterns can be anticipated, the greater our collective ability to undertake sound city, metropolitan, rural, and bioregional planning.

Consider two scenarios for the year 2100. In the first, California's population would grow to 80 million persons and would occupy the landscape at an average density of eight persons per acre, the current statewide urban average. Under this scenario, and assuming that 10% percent of California's future population growth would occur through infill-that is, on existing urban land-California's expanding urban population would consume an additional 5.06 million acres of currently undeveloped land. As an alternative, assume the share of infill development were increased to 30%, and that new population were accommodated at a density of about 12 persons per acre-which is the current average density of the City of Los Angeles. Under this second scenario, California's urban population would consume an additional 2.6 million acres of currently undeveloped land. While both scenarios accommodate the same amount of population growth and generate large increments of additional urban development-indeed, some might say even the second scenario allows far too much growth and development-the second scenario is far kinder to California's unique natural landscape.

This report presents the results of a series of baseline population and urban growth projections for California's 38 urban counties through the year 2100. Presented in map and table form, these projections are based on extrapolations of current population trends and recent urban development trends. The next section, titled Approach, outlines the methodology and data used to develop the various projections. The following section, Baseline Scenario, reviews the projections themselves. A final section, entitled Baseline Impacts, quantitatively assesses the impacts of the baseline projections on wetland, hillside, farmland and habitat loss.

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Life Expectancy (EQ6)

FULL MEASURE NAME Life Expectancy

LAST UPDATED April 2017

DESCRIPTION Life expectancy refers to the average number of years a newborn is expected to live if mortality patterns remain the same. The measure reflects the mortality rate across a population for a point in time.

DATA SOURCE State of California, Department of Health: Death Records (1990-2013) No link

California Department of Finance: Population Estimates Annual Intercensal Population Estimates (1990-2010) Table P-2: County Population by Age (2010-2013) http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/

CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Life expectancy is commonly used as a measure of the health of a population. Life expectancy does not reflect how long any given individual is expected to live; rather, it is an artificial measure that captures an aspect of the mortality rates across a population. Vital Signs measures life expectancy at birth (as opposed to cohort life expectancy). A statistical model was used to estimate life expectancy for Bay Area counties and Zip codes based on current life tables which require both age and mortality data. A life table is a table which shows, for each age, the survivorship of a people from a certain population.

Current life tables were created using death records and population estimates by age. The California Department of Public Health provided death records based on the California death certificate information. Records include age at death and residential Zip code. Single-year age population estimates at the regional- and county-level comes from the California Department of Finance population estimates and projections for ages 0-100+. Population estimates for ages 100 and over are aggregated to a single age interval. Using this data, death rates in a population within age groups for a given year are computed to form unabridged life tables (as opposed to abridged life tables). To calculate life expectancy, the probability of dying between the jth and (j+1)st birthday is assumed uniform after age 1. Special consideration is taken to account for infant mortality. For the Zip code-level life expectancy calculation, it is assumed that postal Zip codes share the same boundaries as Zip Code Census Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs). More information on the relationship between Zip codes and ZCTAs can be found at https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/zctas.html. Zip code-level data uses three years of mortality data to make robust estimates due to small sample size. Year 2013 Zip code life expectancy estimates reflects death records from 2011 through 2013. 2013 is the last year with available mortality data. Death records for Zip codes with zero population (like those associated with P.O. Boxes) were assigned to the nearest Zip code with population. Zip code population for 2000 estimates comes from the Decennial Census. Zip code population for 2013 estimates are from the American Community Survey (5-Year Average). The ACS provides Zip code population by age in five-year age intervals. Single-year age population estimates were calculated by distributing population within an age interval to single-year ages using the county distribution. Counties were assigned to Zip codes based on majority land-area.

Zip codes in the Bay Area vary in population from over 10,000 residents to less than 20 residents. Traditional life expectancy estimation (like the one used for the regional- and county-level Vital Signs estimates) cannot be used because they are highly inaccurate for small populations and may result in over/underestimation of life expectancy. To avoid inaccurate estimates, Zip codes with populations of less than 5,000 were aggregated with neighboring Zip codes until the merged areas had a population of more than 5,000. In this way, the original 305 Bay Area Zip codes were reduced to 218 Zip code areas for 2013 estimates. Next, a form of Bayesian random-effects analysis was used which established a prior distribution of the probability of death at each age using the regional distribution. This prior is used to shore up the life expectancy calculations where data were sparse.

Vehicle population is updated annually, each April, to reflect the number of vehicles “on the road” during the previous calendar year. Vehicle population counts vehicles whose registration is either current or less than 35 days expired. Sales are higher than population because of vehicle retirements, accidents, owners moving out of state, or other reasons.

Data as of: December 31, 2022

Regional Data Categories Map Filter. Data can be reflected at the county, metropolitan statistical area (MSA), or ZIP code level. Individual registrations were assigned to a region based on mailing address, with the following exceptions:

Out of State: vehicles registered in California with a mailing address in a different state

ZIP Code “99999”: indicates that the ZIP code in the Vehicle Registration database was invalid

Unassigned: remote areas not associated with an MSA

Unknown: Invalid ZIP codes categorized under MSA

This Data contains information from 2010 to 2022.

Please note, that columns 'Manufacturer' and 'Model' include Null values since it was less data in 2010-2012 and more data from 2013.

Examples of Questions you may answer with this Data:

• What is the trend in the number of Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) in California from 2010 to 2022?
• How has the adoption of Gasoline vehicles changed over the years in California, specifically for Flex Fuel?
• Which county in California had the highest number of Diesel vehicles in 2010?
• What is the distribution of Gasoline Hybrid vehicles across California counties in 2020?
• How many Natural Gas vehicles were registered in California in 2010, and did this number change significantly by 2020?
• Which car manufacturer produced the most Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) in California in 2015?
• What is the overall trend in the number of Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEVs) in California over the past decade?
• What is the average number of vehicles per make and model for all Fuel Types in 2019 in California?
• How has the market share of Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) compared to Gasoline vehicles evolved over the years in California?

Columns: Data Year
County
Dashboard Fuel Type Group
Fuel Type
Manufacturer
Model
Number of Vehicles

Chart and table of population level and growth rate for the Los Angeles metro area from 1950 to 2025.

ECM Community Support Services tables for a Quarterly Implementation Report. Including the County and Plan Details for both ECM and Community Support.

This Medi-Cal Enhanced Care Management (ECM) and Community Supports Calendar Year Quarterly Implementation Report provides a comprehensive overview of ECM and Community Supports implementation in the programs' first year. It includes data at the state, county, and plan levels on total members served, utilization, and provider networks.

ECM is a statewide MCP benefit that provides person-centered, community-based care management to the highest need members. The Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) and its MCP partners began implementing ECM in phases by Populations of Focus (POFs), with the first three POFs launching statewide in CY 2022.

Community Supports are services that address members’ health-related social needs and help them avoid higher, costlier levels of care. Although it is optional for MCPs to offer these services, every Medi-Cal MCP offered Community Supports in 2022, and at least two Community Supports services were offered and available in every county by the end of the year.

The dataset "California STD Statistics (2001-2021).csv" contains information about reported cases of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) (chlamydia, gonorrhea, and early syphilis, which includes primary, secondary, and early latent syphilis) across different counties in the United States from the year 2001 to 2021. The data includes details on the number of cases, population estimates, and calculated rates of infection. It is segmented by disease type, county, year, and sex, providing a comprehensive overview of STD prevalence and trends over a 20-year period.

Column Descriptions

Disease: The type of sexually transmitted disease (e.g., Chlamydia, Gonorrhea).

County: The name of the county where the data was collected.

Year: The year when the data was recorded.

Sex: The sex of the population (Female, Male, Total).

Cases: The number of reported cases of the disease.

Population: The estimated population of the county for the given year and sex.

Rate: The rate of infection per 100,000 people.

Lower 95% CI: The lower bound of the 95% confidence interval for the rate.

Upper 95% CI: The upper bound of the 95% confidence interval for the rate.

Annotation Code: Additional annotation codes that are sparsely populated.

Acknowledgement: All rights reserved by CalHHS

https://data.chhs.ca.gov/pages/terms

Usage: CalHHS Open Data Portal Terms of Use

License: CalHHS reserves all rights and terms to use this data

you will find it here on those links

https://data.chhs.ca.gov/pages/terms

https://data.chhs.ca.gov/dataset/stds-in-california-by-disease-county-year-and-sex

LAST MODIFIED: June 4, 2024.

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Daily Miles Traveled (T15)

FULL MEASURE NAME Per-capita vehicle miles traveled

LAST UPDATED July 2017

DESCRIPTION Daily miles traveled, commonly referred to as vehicle miles traveled (VMT), reflects the total and per-person number of miles traveled in personal vehicles on a typical weekday. The dataset includes metropolitan area, regional and county tables for per-capita vehicle miles traveled.

DATA SOURCE California Department of Transportation: California Public Road Data/Highway Performance Monitoring System 2001-2015 http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hpms/datalibrary.php

California Department of Finance: Population and Housing Estimates Forms E-8 and E-5 2001-2015 http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/estimates/e-8/ http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/estimates/e-5/2011-20/view.php

U.S. Census Bureau: Summary File 1 2010 http://factfinder2.census.gov

CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Vehicle miles traveled reflects the mileage accrued within the county and not necessarily the residents of that county; even though most trips are due to local residents, additional VMT can be accrued by through-trips. City data was thus discarded due to this limitation and the analysis only examine county and regional data, where through-trips are generally less common.

The metropolitan area comparison was performed by summing all of the urbanized areas within each metropolitan area (9-nine region for the San Francisco Bay Area and the primary MSA for all others). For the metro analysis, no VMT data is available outside of other urbanized areas; it is only available for intraregional analysis purposes.

VMT per capita is calculated by dividing VMT by an estimate of the traveling population. The traveling population does not include people living in institutionalized facilities, which are defined by the Census. Because institutionalized population is not estimated each year, the proportion of people living in institutionalized facilities from the 2010 Census was applied to the total population estimates for all years.

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Life Expectancy (EQ6)

FULL MEASURE NAME Life Expectancy

LAST UPDATED April 2017

DESCRIPTION Life expectancy refers to the average number of years a newborn is expected to live if mortality patterns remain the same. The measure reflects the mortality rate across a population for a point in time.

DATA SOURCE State of California, Department of Health: Death Records (1990-2013) No link

California Department of Finance: Population Estimates Annual Intercensal Population Estimates (1990-2010) Table P-2: County Population by Age (2010-2013) http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/

CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Life expectancy is commonly used as a measure of the health of a population. Life expectancy does not reflect how long any given individual is expected to live; rather, it is an artificial measure that captures an aspect of the mortality rates across a population. Vital Signs measures life expectancy at birth (as opposed to cohort life expectancy). A statistical model was used to estimate life expectancy for Bay Area counties and Zip codes based on current life tables which require both age and mortality data. A life table is a table which shows, for each age, the survivorship of a people from a certain population.

Current life tables were created using death records and population estimates by age. The California Department of Public Health provided death records based on the California death certificate information. Records include age at death and residential Zip code. Single-year age population estimates at the regional- and county-level comes from the California Department of Finance population estimates and projections for ages 0-100+. Population estimates for ages 100 and over are aggregated to a single age interval. Using this data, death rates in a population within age groups for a given year are computed to form unabridged life tables (as opposed to abridged life tables). To calculate life expectancy, the probability of dying between the jth and (j+1)st birthday is assumed uniform after age 1. Special consideration is taken to account for infant mortality. For the Zip code-level life expectancy calculation, it is assumed that postal Zip codes share the same boundaries as Zip Code Census Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs). More information on the relationship between Zip codes and ZCTAs can be found at https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/zctas.html. Zip code-level data uses three years of mortality data to make robust estimates due to small sample size. Year 2013 Zip code life expectancy estimates reflects death records from 2011 through 2013. 2013 is the last year with available mortality data. Death records for Zip codes with zero population (like those associated with P.O. Boxes) were assigned to the nearest Zip code with population. Zip code population for 2000 estimates comes from the Decennial Census. Zip code population for 2013 estimates are from the American Community Survey (5-Year Average). The ACS provides Zip code population by age in five-year age intervals. Single-year age population estimates were calculated by distributing population within an age interval to single-year ages using the county distribution. Counties were assigned to Zip codes based on majority land-area.

Zip codes in the Bay Area vary in population from over 10,000 residents to less than 20 residents. Traditional life expectancy estimation (like the one used for the regional- and county-level Vital Signs estimates) cannot be used because they are highly inaccurate for small populations and may result in over/underestimation of life expectancy. To avoid inaccurate estimates, Zip codes with populations of less than 5,000 were aggregated with neighboring Zip codes until the merged areas had a population of more than 5,000. In this way, the original 305 Bay Area Zip codes were reduced to 218 Zip code areas for 2013 estimates. Next, a form of Bayesian random-effects analysis was used which established a prior distribution of the probability of death at each age using the regional distribution. This prior is used to shore up the life expectancy calculations where data were sparse.

For the past several censuses, the Census Bureau has invited people to self-respond before following up in-person using census takers. The 2010 Census invited people to self-respond predominately by returning paper questionnaires in the mail. The 2020 Census allows people to self-respond in three ways: online, by phone, or by mail.The 2020 Census self-response rates are self-response rates for current census geographies. These rates are the daily and cumulative self-response rates for all housing units that received invitations to self-respond to the 2020 Census. The 2020 Census self-response rates are available for states, counties, census tracts, congressional districts, towns and townships, consolidated cities, incorporated places, tribal areas, and tribal census tracts.The Self-Response Rate of Los Angeles County is 65.1% for 2020 Census, which is slightly lower than 69.6% of California State rate.More information about these data is available in the Self-Response Rates Map Data and Technical Documentation document associated with the 2020 Self-Response Rates Map or review FAQs.Animated Self-Response Rate 2010 vs 2020 is available at ESRI site SRR Animated Maps and can explore Census 2020 SRR data at ESRI Demographic site Census 2020 SSR Data.Following Demographic Characteristics are included in this data and web maps to visualize their relationships with Census Self-Response Rate (SRR).1. Population Density: 2020 Population per square mile,2. Poverty Rate: Percentage of population under 100% FPL,3. Median Household income: Based on countywide median HH income of $71,538.4. Highschool Education Attainment: Percentage of 18 years and older population without high school graduation.5. English Speaking Ability: Percentage of 18 years and older population with less or none English speaking ability. 6. Household without Internet Access: Percentage of HH without internet access.7. Non-Hispanic White Population: Percentage of Non-Hispanic White population.8. Non-Hispanic African-American Population: Percentage of Non-Hispanic African-American population.9. Non-Hispanic Asian Population: Percentage of Non-Hispanic Asian population.10. Hispanic Population: Percentage of Hispanic population.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the detailed breakdown of the count of individuals within distinct income brackets, categorizing them by gender (men and women) and employment type - full-time (FT) and part-time (PT), offering valuable insights into the diverse income landscapes within Napa County. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based income distribution within the Napa County population, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..

Key observations

• Employment patterns: Within Napa County, among individuals aged 15 years and older with income, there were 51,813 men and 49,339 women in the workforce. Among them, 27,168 men were engaged in full-time, year-round employment, while 19,974 women were in full-time, year-round roles.
• Annual income under $24,999: Of the male population working full-time, 6.95% fell within the income range of under $24,999, while 7.42% of the female population working full-time was represented in the same income bracket.
• Annual income above $100,000: 35.39% of men in full-time roles earned incomes exceeding $100,000, while 33.50% of women in full-time positions earned within this income bracket.
• Refer to the research insights for more key observations on more income brackets ( Annual income under $24,999, Annual income between $25,000 and $49,999, Annual income between $50,000 and $74,999, Annual income between $75,000 and $99,999 and Annual income above $100,000) and employment types (full-time year-round and part-time)

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Income brackets:

• $1 to $2,499 or loss
• $2,500 to $4,999
• $5,000 to $7,499
• $7,500 to $9,999
• $10,000 to $12,499
• $12,500 to $14,999
• $15,000 to $17,499
• $17,500 to $19,999
• $20,000 to $22,499
• $22,500 to $24,999
• $25,000 to $29,999
• $30,000 to $34,999
• $35,000 to $39,999
• $40,000 to $44,999
• $45,000 to $49,999
• $50,000 to $54,999
• $55,000 to $64,999
• $65,000 to $74,999
• $75,000 to $99,999
• $100,000 or more

Variables / Data Columns

• Income Bracket: This column showcases 20 income brackets ranging from $1 to $100,000+..
• Full-Time Males: The count of males employed full-time year-round and earning within a specified income bracket
• Part-Time Males: The count of males employed part-time and earning within a specified income bracket
• Full-Time Females: The count of females employed full-time year-round and earning within a specified income bracket
• Part-Time Females: The count of females employed part-time and earning within a specified income bracket

Employment type classifications include:

• Full-time, year-round: A full-time, year-round worker is a person who worked full time (35 or more hours per week) and 50 or more weeks during the previous calendar year.
• Part-time: A part-time worker is a person who worked less than 35 hours per week during the previous calendar year.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Napa County median household income by race. You can refer the same here

Blocks are typically bounded by streets, roads or creeks. In cities, a census block may correspond to a city block, but in rural areas where there are fewer roads, blocks may be limited by other features. The Census Bureau established blocks covering the entire nation for the first time in 1990.There are less number of Census Blocks within Los Angeles County in 2020 Census TIGER/Line Shapefiles, compared in 2010.Updated:1. June 2023: This update includes 2022 November Santa Clarita City annexation and the addition of "Kinneloa Mesa" community (was a part of unincorporated East Pasadena). Added new data fields FIP_CURRENT to CITYCOMM_CURRENT to reflect new/updated city and communities. Updated city/community names and FIP codes of census blocks that are in 2022 November Santa Clarita City annexation and new Kinneloa Mesa community (look for FIP_Current, City_Current, Comm_Current field values)2. February 2023: Updated few Census Block CSA values based on Demographic Consultant inquiry/suggestions3. April 2022: Updated Census Block data attribute values based on Supervisorial District 2021, Service Planning Area 2022, Health District 2022 and ZIP Code Tabulation Area 2020Created: March 2021How This Data is Created? This census geographic file was downloaded from Census Bureau website: https://www2.census.gov/geo/tiger/TIGER2020PL/STATE/06_CALIFORNIA/06037/ on February 2021 and customized for LA County. New data fields are added in the census blocks 2020 data and populated with city/community names, LA County FIPS, 2021 Supervisorial Districts, 2020 Census Zip Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA) and some administrative boundary information such as 2022 Health Districts and 2022 Service Planning Areas (SPS) are also added. "Housing20" field value and "Pop20" field value is populated with PL 94-171 Redistricting Data Summary File: Decennial Census P.L. 94-171 Redistricting Data Summary Files. Similarly, "Feat_Type" field is added and populated with water, ocean and land values. Five new data fields (FIP_CURRENT to CITYCOMM_CURRENT) are added in June 2023 updates to accommodate 2022 Santa Clarita city annexation. City/community names and FIP codes of census blocks affected by 2022 November Santa Clarita City annexation are assigned based on the location of block centroids. In June 2023 update, total of 36 blocks assigned to the City of Santa Clarita that were in Unincorporated Valencia and Castaic. Note: This data includes 3 NM ocean (FEAT_TYPE field). However, user can use a definition query to remove those. Data Fields: 1. STATE (STATEFP20): State FIP, "06" for California, 2. COUNTY (COUNTYFP20): County FIP "037" for Los Angeles County, 3. CT20: (TRACTCE20): 6-digit census tract number, 4. BG20: 7-digit block group number, 5. CB20 (BLOCKCE20): 4-digit census block number, 6. CTCB20: Combination of CT20 and CB20, 7. FEAT_TYPE: Land use types such as water bodies, ocean (3 NM ocean) or land, 8. FIP20: Los Angeles County FIP code, 9. BGFIP20: Combination of BG20 and FIP20, 10. CITY: Incorporated city name, 11. COMM: Unincorporated area community name and LA City neighborhood, also known as "CSA", 12. CITYCOMM: City/Community name label, 13. ZCTA20: Parcel specific zip codes, 14. HD12: 2012 Health District number, 15. HD_NAME: Health District name, 16. SPA22: 2022 Service Planning Area number, 17. SPA_NAME: Service Planning Area name, 18. SUP21: 2021 Supervisorial District number, 19. SUP_LABEL: Supervisorial District label, 20. POP20: 2020 Population (PL 94-171 Redistricting Data Summary File - Total Population), 21. HOUSING20: 2020 housing (PL 94-171 Redistricting Data Summary File - Total Housing),22. FIP_CURRENT: Los Angeles County 2023 FIP code, as of June 2023,23. BG20FIP_CURRENT: Combination of BG20 and 2023 FIP, as of June 2023,24. CITY_CURRENT: 2023 Incorporated city name, as of June 2023,25. COMM_CURRENT: 2023 Unincorporated area community name and LA City neighborhood, also known as "CSA", as of June 2023,26. CITYCOMM_CURRENT: 2023 City/Community name label, as of June 2023.

Ages chart illustrates the age and gender trends across all age and gender groupings. A chart where the the covered area is primarily on the right describes a very young population while a chart where the the covered area is primarily on the left illustrates an aging population.

Daily Miles Traveled (T14)

FULL MEASURE NAME
Total vehicle miles traveled

LAST UPDATED
August 2022

DESCRIPTION
Daily miles traveled, commonly referred to as vehicle miles traveled (VMT), reflects the total and per-person number of miles traveled in personal vehicles on a typical weekday. The dataset includes metropolitan area, regional and county tables for total vehicle miles traveled.

DATA SOURCE
California Department of Transportation: California Public Road Data/Highway Performance Monitoring System - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hpms/datalibrary.php
2001-2020

Federal Highway Administration: Highway Statistics - https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2020/hm71.cfm
2020

California Department of Finance: E-4 Historical Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State - https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/
2001-2020

US Census Population and Housing Unit Estimates - https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest.html
2020

CONTACT INFORMATION
vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator)
Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reflects the mileage accrued within the county and not necessarily the residents of that county; even though most trips are due to local residents, additional VMT can be accrued by through-trips. City data was thus discarded due to this limitation and the analysis only examines county and regional data, where through-trips are generally less common.

The metropolitan area comparison was performed by summing all of the urbanized areas for which the majority of its population falls within a given metropolitan area (9-county region for the San Francisco Bay Area and the primary metropolitan statistical area (MSA) for all others). For the metro analysis, no VMT data is available in rural areas; it is only available for intraregional analysis purposes. VMT per capita is calculated by dividing VMT by an estimate of the traveling population.

Daily Miles Traveled (T14)

FULL MEASURE NAME
Total vehicle miles traveled

LAST UPDATED
August 2022

DESCRIPTION
Daily miles traveled, commonly referred to as vehicle miles traveled (VMT), reflects the total and per-person number of miles traveled in personal vehicles on a typical weekday. The dataset includes metropolitan area, regional and county tables for total vehicle miles traveled.

DATA SOURCE
California Department of Transportation: California Public Road Data/Highway Performance Monitoring System - http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hpms/datalibrary.php
2001-2020

Federal Highway Administration: Highway Statistics - https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2020/hm71.cfm
2020

California Department of Finance: E-4 Historical Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State - https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/
2001-2020

US Census Population and Housing Unit Estimates - https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest.html
2020

CONTACT INFORMATION
vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator)
Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reflects the mileage accrued within the county and not necessarily the residents of that county; even though most trips are due to local residents, additional VMT can be accrued by through-trips. City data was thus discarded due to this limitation and the analysis only examines county and regional data, where through-trips are generally less common.

The metropolitan area comparison was performed by summing all of the urbanized areas for which the majority of its population falls within a given metropolitan area (9-county region for the San Francisco Bay Area and the primary metropolitan statistical area (MSA) for all others). For the metro analysis, no VMT data is available in rural areas; it is only available for intraregional analysis purposes. VMT per capita is calculated by dividing VMT by an estimate of the traveling population.