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

In 2022, the total population of the Guangdong - Hong Kong - Macao Greater Bay Area reached around **** million. In terms of population, China's Greater Bay Area was larger than other major Bay Areas in the world. However, per capita GDP was only about half of that in the Tokyo Bay Area and only one seventh of that in the San Francisco Bay Area.

In 2023, the population of the San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley metropolitan area in the United States was about 4.57 million people. This is a slight decrease from the previous year, when the population was about 4.58 million people.

INTRODUCTION: As California’s homeless population continues to grow at an alarming rate, large metropolitan regions like the San Francisco Bay Area face unique challenges in coordinating efforts to track and improve homelessness. As an interconnected region of nine counties with diverse community needs, identifying homeless population trends across San Francisco Bay Area counties can help direct efforts more effectively throughout the region, and inform initiatives to improve homelessness at the city, county, and metropolitan level. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this research is to compare the annual Point-in-Time (PIT) counts of homelessness across San Francisco Bay Area counties between the years 2018-2022. The secondary objective of this research is to compare the annual Point-in-Time (PIT) counts of homelessness among different age groups in each of the nine San Francisco Bay Area counties between the years 2018-2022. METHODS: Two datasets were used to conduct research. The first dataset (Dataset 1) contains Point-in-Time (PIT) homeless counts published by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Dataset 1 was cleaned using Microsoft Excel and uploaded to Tableau Desktop Public Edition 2022.4.1 as a CSV file. The second dataset (Dataset 2) was published by Data SF and contains shapefiles of geographic boundaries of San Francisco Bay Area counties. Both datasets were joined in Tableau Desktop Public Edition 2022.4 and all data analysis was conducted using Tableau visualizations in the form of bar charts, highlight tables, and maps. RESULTS: Alameda, San Francisco, and Santa Clara counties consistently reported the highest annual count of people experiencing homelessness across all 5 years between 2018-2022. Alameda, Napa, and San Mateo counties showed the largest increase in homelessness between 2018 and 2022. Alameda County showed a significant increase in homeless individuals under the age of 18. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this research reveal both stark and fluctuating differences in homeless counts among San Francisco Bay Area Counties over time, suggesting that a regional approach that focuses on collaboration across counties and coordination of services could prove beneficial for improving homelessness throughout the region. Results suggest that more immediate efforts to improve homelessness should focus on the counties of Alameda, San Francisco, Santa Clara, and San Mateo. Changes in homelessness during the COVID-19 pandemic years of 2020-2022 point to an urgent need to support Contra Costa County.

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Population (LU1)

FULL MEASURE NAME
Population estimates

LAST UPDATED
February 2023

DESCRIPTION
Population is a measurement of the number of residents that live in a given geographical area, be it a neighborhood, city, county or region.

DATA SOURCE
California Department of Finance: Population and Housing Estimates - http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/
Table E-6: County Population Estimates (1960-1970)
Table E-4: Population Estimates for Counties and State (1970-2021)
Table E-8: Historical Population and Housing Estimates (1990-2010)
Table E-5: Population and Housing Estimates (2010-2021)

Bay Area Jurisdiction Centroids (2020) - https://data.bayareametro.gov/Boundaries/Bay-Area-Jurisdiction-Centroids-2020-/56ar-t6bs
Computed using 2020 US Census TIGER boundaries

U.S. Census Bureau: Decennial Census Population Estimates - http://www.s4.brown.edu/us2010/index.htm- via Longitudinal Tract Database Spatial Structures in the Social Sciences, Brown University
1970-2020

U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey (5-year rolling average; tract) - https://data.census.gov/
2011-2021
Form B01003

Priority Development Areas (Plan Bay Area 2050) - https://opendata.mtc.ca.gov/datasets/MTC::priority-development-areas-plan-bay-area-2050/about

CONTACT INFORMATION
vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator)
All historical data reported for Census geographies (metropolitan areas, county, city and tract) use current legal boundaries and names. A Priority Development Area (PDA) is a locally-designated area with frequent transit service, where a jurisdiction has decided to concentrate most of its housing and jobs growth for development in the foreseeable future. PDA boundaries are current as of December 2022.

Population estimates for Bay Area counties and cities are from the California Department of Finance, which are as of January 1st of each year. Population estimates for non-Bay Area regions are from the U.S. Census Bureau. Decennial Census years reflect population as of April 1st of each year whereas population estimates for intercensal estimates are as of July 1st of each year. Population estimates for Bay Area tracts are from the decennial Census (1970-2020) and the American Community Survey (2011-2021 5-year rolling average). Estimates of population density for tracts use gross acres as the denominator.

Population estimates for Bay Area tracts and PDAs are from the decennial Census (1970-2020) and the American Community Survey (2011-2021 5-year rolling average). Population estimates for PDAs are allocated from tract-level Census population counts using an area ratio. For example, if a quarter of a Census tract lies with in a PDA, a quarter of its population will be allocated to that PDA. Estimates of population density for PDAs use gross acres as the denominator. Note that the population densities between PDAs reported in previous iterations of Vital Signs are mostly not comparable due to minor differences and an updated set of PDAs (previous iterations reported Plan Bay Area 2040 PDAs, whereas current iterations report Plan Bay Area 2050 PDAs).

The following is a list of cities and towns by geographical area:

Big Three: San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland

Bayside: Alameda, Albany, Atherton, Belmont, Belvedere, Berkeley, Brisbane, Burlingame, Campbell, Colma, Corte Madera, Cupertino, Daly City, East Palo Alto, El Cerrito, Emeryville, Fairfax, Foster City, Fremont, Hayward, Hercules, Hillsborough, Larkspur, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Menlo Park, Mill Valley, Millbrae, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Mountain View, Newark, Pacifica, Palo Alto, Piedmont, Pinole, Portola Valley, Redwood City, Richmond, Ross, San Anselmo, San Bruno, San Carlos, San Leandro, San Mateo, San Pablo, San Rafael, Santa Clara, Saratoga, Sausalito, South San Francisco, Sunnyvale, Tiburon, Union City, Vallejo, Woodside

Inland, Delta and Coastal: American Canyon, Antioch, Benicia, Brentwood, Calistoga, Clayton, Cloverdale, Concord, Cotati, Danville, Dixon, Dublin, Fairfield, Gilroy, Half Moon Bay, Healdsburg, Lafayette, Livermore, Martinez, Moraga, Morgan Hill, Napa, Novato, Oakley, Orinda, Petaluma, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Pleasanton, Rio Vista, Rohnert Park, San Ramon, Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, Sonoma, St. Helena, Suisun City, Vacaville, Walnut Creek, Windsor, Yountville

Unincorporated: all unincorporated towns

This raster dataset depicts the population denisty of the nine county San Francisco Bay Area Region, California produced with a Dasymetric Mapping Technique, which is used to depict quantitative areal data using boundaries that divide an area into zones of relative homogeneity with the purpose of better portraying the population distribution. The source data was then adjusted in order to get convert the units to persons per acre. This dataset is an accurate representation of population distribution within census boundaries and can be used in a number of ways, including as the Conservation Suitability layer for the Marxan inputs and the watershed integrity analysis.

Table of population and demographic forecast numbers from Plan Bay Area 2040 for the San Francisco Bay Region. Population and demographic numbers are included for 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020, 2030, 2035, and 2040. There are no forecast numbers for 2025.The Plan Bay Area forecast numbers were generated by Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ). The Population and Demographics forecast table will need to be joined to TAZ features in order to spatially visualize the data. The TAZ features are available for download here.2005-2040 data in this table:Total PopulationHousehold PopulationGroup Quarters Population0 - 4 Age Group5 - 19 Age Group20 - 44 Age Group44 - 64 Age Group65+ Age GroupShare of Total Population that is 62 and OverHigh School EnrollmentCollege Enrollment (full-time)College Enrollment (part-time)Other Plan Bay Area 2040 forecast tables:Employment (total employment, TAZ resident employment, retail employment, financial and professional services employment, health, educational, and recreational employment, manufacturing, wholesale, and transportation employment, agricultural and natural resources employment, and other employment)Households (number of households and household income quartile)Land Use and Transportation (area type, commercial or industrial acres, residential acres, number of single-family and multi-family dwelling units, time to get from automobile storage location to origin/destination, and hourly parking rates)

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Population (LU1)

FULL MEASURE NAME Population estimates

LAST UPDATED October 2019

DESCRIPTION Population is a measurement of the number of residents that live in a given geographical area, be it a neighborhood, city, county or region.

DATA SOURCES U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census No link available (1960-1990) http://factfinder.census.gov (2000-2010)

California Department of Finance: Population and Housing Estimates Table E-6: County Population Estimates (1961-1969) Table E-4: Population Estimates for Counties and State (1971-1989) Table E-8: Historical Population and Housing Estimates (2001-2018) Table E-5: Population and Housing Estimates (2011-2019) http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/

U.S. Census Bureau: Decennial Census - via Longitudinal Tract Database Spatial Structures in the Social Sciences, Brown University Population Estimates (1970 - 2010) http://www.s4.brown.edu/us2010/index.htm

U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey 5-Year Population Estimates (2011-2017) http://factfinder.census.gov

U.S. Census Bureau: Intercensal Estimates Estimates of the Intercensal Population of Counties (1970-1979) Intercensal Estimates of the Resident Population (1980-1989) Population Estimates (1990-1999) Annual Estimates of the Population (2000-2009) Annual Estimates of the Population (2010-2017) No link available (1970-1989) http://www.census.gov/popest/data/metro/totals/1990s/tables/MA-99-03b.txt http://www.census.gov/popest/data/historical/2000s/vintage_2009/metro.html https://www.census.gov/data/datasets/time-series/demo/popest/2010s-total-metro-and-micro-statistical-areas.html

CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) All legal boundaries and names for Census geography (metropolitan statistical area, county, city, and tract) are as of January 1, 2010, released beginning November 30, 2010, by the U.S. Census Bureau. A Priority Development Area (PDA) is a locally-designated area with frequent transit service, where a jurisdiction has decided to concentrate most of its housing and jobs growth for development in the foreseeable future. PDA boundaries are current as of August 2019. For more information on PDA designation see http://gis.abag.ca.gov/website/PDAShowcase/.

Population estimates for Bay Area counties and cities are from the California Department of Finance, which are as of January 1st of each year. Population estimates for non-Bay Area regions are from the U.S. Census Bureau. Decennial Census years reflect population as of April 1st of each year whereas population estimates for intercensal estimates are as of July 1st of each year. Population estimates for Bay Area tracts are from the decennial Census (1970 -2010) and the American Community Survey (2008-2012 5-year rolling average; 2010-2014 5-year rolling average; 2013-2017 5-year rolling average). Estimates of population density for tracts use gross acres as the denominator.

Population estimates for Bay Area PDAs are from the decennial Census (1970 - 2010) and the American Community Survey (2006-2010 5 year rolling average; 2010-2014 5-year rolling average; 2013-2017 5-year rolling average). Population estimates for PDAs are derived from Census population counts at the tract level for 1970-1990 and at the block group level for 2000-2017. Population from either tracts or block groups are allocated to a PDA using an area ratio. For example, if a quarter of a Census block group lies with in a PDA, a quarter of its population will be allocated to that PDA. Tract-to-PDA and block group-to-PDA area ratios are calculated using gross acres. Estimates of population density for PDAs use gross acres as the denominator.

Annual population estimates for metropolitan areas outside the Bay Area are from the Census and are benchmarked to each decennial Census. The annual estimates in the 1990s were not updated to match the 2000 benchmark.

The following is a list of cities and towns by geographical area: Big Three: San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland Bayside: Alameda, Albany, Atherton, Belmont, Belvedere, Berkeley, Brisbane, Burlingame, Campbell, Colma, Corte Madera, Cupertino, Daly City, East Palo Alto, El Cerrito, Emeryville, Fairfax, Foster City, Fremont, Hayward, Hercules, Hillsborough, Larkspur, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Menlo Park, Mill Valley, Millbrae, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Mountain View, Newark, Pacifica, Palo Alto, Piedmont, Pinole, Portola Valley, Redwood City, Richmond, Ross, San Anselmo, San Bruno, San Carlos, San Leandro, San Mateo, San Pablo, San Rafael, Santa Clara, Saratoga, Sausalito, South San Francisco, Sunnyvale, Tiburon, Union City, Vallejo, Woodside Inland, Delta and Coastal: American Canyon, Antioch, Benicia, Brentwood, Calistoga, Clayton, Cloverdale, Concord, Cotati, Danville, Dixon, Dublin, Fairfield, Gilroy, Half Moon Bay, Healdsburg, Lafayette, Livermore, Martinez, Moraga, Morgan Hill, Napa, Novato, Oakley, Orinda, Petaluma, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Pleasanton, Rio Vista, Rohnert Park, San Ramon, Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, Sonoma, St. Helena, Suisun City, Vacaville, Walnut Creek, Windsor, Yountville Unincorporated: all unincorporated towns

Tracts; January 1, 2019 vintage; Generalized

Features provide a view of 2020 Census tracts for the San Francisco Bay Region. Features are a subset of the Census Tracts 500k service at https://data.bayareametro.gov/dataset/Census-Tracts-500K/dg5p-pxcu.

Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county or equivalent entity, and were defined by local participants as part of the 2020 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program. The Census Bureau delineated the census tracts in situations where no local participant existed or where all the potential participants declined to participate. The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to previous decennial censuses.

Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people. When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline.

Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division or incorporated place boundaries in some States and situations to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy.

In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities that are themselves noncontiguous.

For the 2010 Census and beyond, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2000 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area, no land area.

The Census Bureau uses suffixes to help identify census tract changes for comparison purposes. Local participants have an opportunity to review the existing census tracts before each census. If local participants split a census tract, the split parts usually retain the basic number, but receive different suffixes. In a few counties, local participants request major changes to, and renumbering of, the census tracts. Changes to individual census tract boundaries usually do not result in census tract numbering changes.

Relationship to Other Geographic Entities—Within the standard census geographic hierarchy, census tracts never cross state or county boundaries, but may cross the boundaries of county subdivisions, places, urban areas, voting districts, congressional districts, and American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian areas.

Rising sea levels (SLR) will cause coastal groundwater to rise in many coastal urban environments. Inundation of contaminated soils by groundwater rise (GWR) will alter the physical, biological, and geochemical conditions that influence the fate and transport of existing contaminants. These transformed products can be more toxic and/or more mobile under future conditions driven by SLR and GWR. We reviewed the vulnerability of contaminated sites to GWR in a US national database and in a case comparison with the San Francisco Bay region to estimate the risk of rising groundwater to human and ecosystem health. The results show that 326 sites in the US Superfund program may be vulnerable to changes in groundwater depth or flow direction as a result of SLR, representing 18.1 million hectares of contaminated land. In the San Francisco Bay Area, we found that GWR is predicted to impact twice as much coastal land area as inundation from SLR alone, and 5,297 state-managed sites of contamination may be vulnerable to inundation from GWR in a 1-meter SLR scenario. Increases of only a few centimeters of elevation can mobilize soil contaminants, alter flow directions in a heterogeneous urban environment with underground pipes and utility trenches, and result in new exposure pathways. Pumping for flood protection will elevate the salt water interface, changing groundwater salinity and mobilizing metals in soil. Socially vulnerable communities are more exposed to this risk at both the national scale and in a regional comparison with the San Francisco Bay Area. Methods Data Dryad This data set includes data from the California State Water Resources Control Board (WRCB), the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the USGS, the US EPA, and the US Census. National Assessment Data Processing: For this portion of the project, ArcGIS Pro and RStudio software applications were used. Data processing for superfund site contaminants in the text and supplementary materials was done in RStudio using R programming language. RStudio and R were also used to clean population data from the American Community Survey. Packages used include: Dplyr, data.table, and tidyverse to clean and organize data from the EPA and ACS. ArcGIS Pro was used to compute spatial data regarding sites in the risk zone and vulnerable populations. DEM data processed for each state removed any elevation data above 10m, keeping anything 10m and below. The Intersection tool was used to identify superfund sites within the 10m sea level rise risk zone. The Calculate Geometry tool was used to calculate the area within each coastal state that was occupied by the 10m SLR zone and used again to calculate the area of each superfund site. Summary Statistics were used to generate the total proportion of superfund site surface area / 10m SLR area for each state. To generate population estimates of socially vulnerable households in proximity to superfund sites, we followed methods similar to that of Carter and Kalman (2020). First, we generated buffers at the 1km, 3km, and 5km distance of superfund sites. Then, using Tabulate Intersection, the estimated population of each census block group within each buffer zone was calculated. Summary Statistics were used to generate total numbers for each state. Bay Area Data Processing: In this regional study, we compared the groundwater elevation projections by Befus et al (2020) to a combined dataset of contaminated sites that we built from two separate databases (Envirostor and GeoTracker) that are maintained by two independent agencies of the State of California (DTSC and WRCB). We used ArcGIS to manage both the groundwater surfaces, as raster files, from Befus et al (2020) and the State’s point datasets of street addresses for contaminated sites. We used SF BCDC (2020) as the source of social vulnerability rankings for census blocks, using block shapefiles from the US Census (ACS) dataset. In addition, we generated isolines that represent the magnitude of change in groundwater elevation in specific sea level rise scenarios. We compared these isolines of change in elevation to the USGS geological map of the San Francisco Bay region and noted that groundwater is predicted to rise farther inland where Holocene paleochannels meet artificial fill near the shoreline. We also used maps of historic baylands (altered by dikes and fill) from the San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) to identify the number of contaminated sites over rising groundwater that are located on former mudflats and tidal marshes. The contaminated sites' data from the California State Water Resources Control Board (WRCB) and the Department of Toxic Substances (DTSC) was clipped to our study area of nine-bay area counties. The study area does not include the ocean shorelines or the north bay delta area because the water system dynamics differ in deltas. The data was cleaned of any duplicates within each dataset using the Find Identical and Delete Identical tools. Then duplicates between the two datasets were removed by running the intersect tool for the DTSC and WRCB point data. We chose this method over searching for duplicates by name because some sites change names when management is transferred from DTSC to WRCB. Lastly, the datasets were sorted into open and closed sites based on the DTSC and WRCB classifications which are shown in a table in the paper's supplemental material. To calculate areas of rising groundwater, we used data from the USGS paper “Projected groundwater head for coastal California using present-day and future sea-level rise scenarios” by Befus, K. M., Barnard, P., Hoover, D. J., & Erikson, L. (2020). We used the hydraulic conductivity of 1 condition (Kh1) to calculate areas of rising groundwater. We used the Raster Calculator to subtract the existing groundwater head from the groundwater head under a 1-meter of sea level rise scenario to find the areas where groundwater is rising. Using the Reclass Raster tool, we reclassified the data to give every cell with a value of 0.1016 meters (4”) or greater a value of 1. We chose 0.1016 because groundwater rise of that little can leach into pipes and infrastructure. We then used the Raster to Poly tool to generate polygons of areas of groundwater rise.

Incorporated Places (cities and towns) are those reported to the Census Bureau as legally in existence as of May 28, 2021, under the laws of their respective states. Features were extracted from California 2020 TIGER/Line shapefile by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. An incorporated place provides governmental functions for a concentration of people, as opposed to a minor civil division, which generally provides services or administers an area without regard, necessarily, to population. Places may extend across county and county subdivision boundaries, but never across state boundaries. An incorporated place usually is a city, town, village, or borough, but can have other legal descriptions.

2020 Census tracts for the San Francisco Bay Region. Features were extracted from California 2021 TIGER/Line shapefile by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county or equivalent entity, and were defined by local participants as part of the 2020 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program. The Census Bureau delineated the census tracts in situations where no local participant existed or where all the potential participants declined to participate. The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to previous decennial censuses.Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people. When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline.Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division (MCD) or incorporated place boundaries in some States and situations to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy.In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities that are themselves noncontiguous.For the 2010 Census and beyond, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2000 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area, no land area.The Census Bureau uses suffixes to help identify census tract changes for comparison purposes. Local participants have an opportunity to review the existing census tracts before each census. If local participants split a census tract, the split parts usually retain the basic number, but receive different suffixes. In a few counties, local participants request major changes to, and renumbering of, the census tracts. Changes to individual census tract boundaries usually do not result in census tract numbering changes.Relationship to Other Geographic Entities—Within the standard census geographic hierarchy, census tracts never cross state or county boundaries, but may cross the boundaries of county subdivisions, places, urban areas, voting districts, congressional districts, and American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian areas.

Please refer to the downloadable XLSX attachment for the complete dataset, metadata, and instructions for use. On behalf of San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA), Corey, Canapary & Galanis (CC&G) conducted the 2021 Mode Share Survey within the City and County of San Francisco as well as the eight surrounding Bay Area counties (Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, Marin, Santa Clara, Napa, Sonoma and Solano). This study has been conducted periodically by CC&G since 2013. Primary goals of this study include: • Estimate mode share for trips into, within, and out of San Francisco, focusing on the percentage of trips made by walking, biking, and public transit compared to other modes (e.g. driving, TNC, etc.). This survey is the primary instrument for tracking the SFMTA Strategic Plan metric “transportation mode share” and provides information used by the agency across divisions. • Evaluation of the above statement based on the number of trips to, from, and within San Francisco by Bay Area residents. Note that trips by visitors from outside the Bay Area, and for commercial purposes whether originating in the Bay Area or not, are not included. • Provide additional trip details, including trip purpose for each trip in the mode share question series. • Collect demographic data on the population of Bay Area residents who travel to, from, and within San Francisco. The survey was conducted as a telephone study among 756 Bay Area residents aged 18 and older. Telephone surveying was conducted during May – September 2021. Interviewing was conducted in English, Spanish, and Chinese. Surveying was conducted via random digit dial (RDD) and cell phone sample. To enhance statistical accuracy, data was weighted by age and location. Not all totals will add to 100% due to rounding. In portions of this report, a dash (-) is used to indicate no respondents answered with the response code listed. The margin of error at the 95% confidence level is +/-3.56% for the total sample (n = 756). For other sample sizes, the margin of error is as follows: • San Francisco residents; n = 470. Margin of error = +/- 4.52% • Bay Area residents (outside San Francisco) n = 286. Margin of error = +/- 5.79%

Place types were defined by grouping United States Census Designated Places as Central Cities, Inner Suburbs, Outer Suburbs, and Balance of Counties for the San Francisco Bay Region, based on their population, employment and travel characteristics.Viewed regionally, the percentage increase in poverty was highest in the Outer Suburbs (62% regional average), as compared to the Central Cities (22% regional average) and Inner Suburbs (24% regional average) showing a pattern of larger increases in poverty in the Region's periphery. The percentage increases in poverty in the Outer Suburbs by County range from 38% to 89%, as compared to the Inner Suburbs which range from 17% to 30% and Central Cities from 3% to 40%.

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Migration (EQ4)

FULL MEASURE NAME Migration flows

LAST UPDATED December 2018

DESCRIPTION Migration refers to the movement of people from one location to another, typically crossing a county or regional boundary. Migration captures both voluntary relocation – for example, moving to another region for a better job or lower home prices – and involuntary relocation as a result of displacement. The dataset includes metropolitan area, regional, and county tables.

DATA SOURCE American Community Survey County-to-County Migration Flows 2012-2015 5-year rolling average http://www.census.gov/topics/population/migration/data/tables.All.html

CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@bayareametro.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Data for migration comes from the American Community Survey; county-to-county flow datasets experience a longer lag time than other standard datasets available in FactFinder. 5-year rolling average data was used for migration for all geographies, as the Census Bureau does not release 1-year annual data. Data is not available at any geography below the county level; note that flows that are relatively small on the county level are often within the margin of error. The metropolitan area comparison was performed for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area, in addition to the primary MSAs for the nine other major metropolitan areas, by aggregating county data based on current metropolitan area boundaries. Data prior to 2011 is not available on Vital Signs due to inconsistent Census formats and a lack of net migration statistics for prior years. Only counties with a non-negligible flow are shown in the data; all other pairs can be assumed to have zero migration.

Given that the vast majority of migration out of the region was to other counties in California, California counties were bundled into the following regions for simplicity: Bay Area: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma Central Coast: Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz Central Valley: Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Tulare Los Angeles + Inland Empire: Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura Sacramento: El Dorado, Placer, Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo, Yuba San Diego: San Diego San Joaquin Valley: San Joaquin, Stanislaus Rural: all other counties (23)

One key limitation of the American Community Survey migration data is that it is not able to track emigration (movement of current U.S. residents to other countries). This is despite the fact that it is able to quantify immigration (movement of foreign residents to the U.S.), generally by continent of origin. Thus the Vital Signs analysis focuses primarily on net domestic migration, while still specifically citing in-migration flows from countries abroad based on data availability.

Table of household forecast numbers from Plan Bay Area 2040 for the San Francisco Bay Region. Household numbers are included for 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020, 2030, 2035, and 2040. There are no forecast numbers for 2025.The Plan Bay Area forecast numbers were generated by Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ). The Household forecast table will need to be joined to TAZ features in order to spatially visualize the data. The TAZ features are available for download here.2005-2040 data in this table:Total HouseholdsNumber of Households in Lowest Income QuartileNumber of Households in Second Lowest Income QuartileNumber of Households in Second highest Income QuartileNumber of Households in Highest Income QuartileOther Plan Bay Area 2040 forecast tables:Employment (total employment, TAZ resident employment, retail employment, financial and professional services employment, health, educational, and recreational employment, manufacturing, wholesale, and transportation employment, agricultural and natural resources employment, and other employment)Land Use and Transportation (area type, commercial or industrial acres, residential acres, number of single-family and multi-family dwelling units, time to get from automobile storage location to origin/destination, and hourly parking rates)Population and Demographics (total population, household and group quarter populations, population by age group, share of population that is 62+, high school enrollment, and college enrollment)

This polygon shapefile contains superdistrict boundaries and population statistics created by the Metropolitan Transportation Comission (MTC) using Census 2000 data. Superdistricts are used in the analysis of sub-county level demographic and travel forecasts. MTC maintains a set of regional travel analysis zones for use in MTC planning studies. These travel analysis zones (TAZs) are typically small area neighborhoods or communities that serve as the smallest geographic basis for travel demand model forecasting systems. From time to time, MTC updates the regional travel analysis zone system to reflect changes in decennial census geography, changes in computing capability, and forecasting needs for particular corridor studies. In addition to regional TAZs and counties, MTC supports an intermediate geographic scale, "superdistricts," for analysis and reporting purposes. There are 34 superdistricts in the nine-county Bay Area. This layer is part of the Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) GIS Maps and Data collection.

Table of land use and transportation forecast numbers from Plan Bay Area 2040 for the San Francisco Bay Region. Land use and transportation numbers are included for 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020, 2030, 2035, and 2040. There are no forecast numbers for 2025.The Plan Bay Area forecast numbers were generated by Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ). The Land Use and Transportation forecast table will need to be joined to TAZ features in order to spatially visualize the data. The TAZ features are available for download here.2005-2040 data in this table:Area Type DesignationAcres of Commercial or Industrial UsesAcres of Residential UsesNumber of Single-Family Dwelling UnitsNumber of Multi-Family Dwelling UnitsAverage Travel Time from Automobile Storage Location to Origin/DestinationShort Term Parking Hourly RateLong Term Parking Hourly Rate (8 hours)Other Plan Bay Area 2040 forecast tables:Employment (total employment, TAZ resident employment, retail employment, financial and professional services employment, health, educational, and recreational employment, manufacturing, wholesale, and transportation employment, agricultural and natural resources employment, and other employment)Households (number of households and household income quartile)Population and Demographics (total population, household and group quarter populations, population by age group, share of population that is 62+, high school enrollment, and college enrollment)

Relative concentration of the Northern California region's American Indian population. The variable AIANALN records all individuals who select American Indian or Alaska Native as their SOLE racial identity in response to the Census questionnaire, regardless of their response to the Hispanic ethnicity question. Both Hispanic and non-Hispanic in the Census questionnaire are potentially associated with American Indian / Alaska Native race alone. IMPORTANT: this self reported ancestry and Tribal membership are distinct identities and one does not automatically imply the other. These data should not be interpreted as a distribution of "Tribal people." Numerous Rancherias in the Northern California region account for the wide distribution of very to extremely high concentrations of American Indians outside the San Francisco Bay Area.

"Relative concentration" is a measure that compares the proportion of population within each Census block group data unit that identify as American Indian / Alaska Native alone to the proportion of all people that live within the 1,207 block groups in the Northern California RRK region that identify as American Indian / Alaska native alone. Example: if 5.2% of people in a block group identify as AIANALN, the block group has twice the proportion of AIANALN individuals compared to the Northern California RRK region (2.6%), and more than three times the proportion compared to the entire state of California (1.6%). If the local proportion is twice the regional proportion, then AIANALN individuals are highly concentrated locally.

Racial diversity is measured by a diversity index that is calculated using United States Census racial and ethnic population characteristics from the PL-94 data file. The diversity index is a quantitative measure of the distribution of the proportion of five major ethnic populations (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Asian and Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and Two or more races). The index ranges from 0 (low diversity meaning only one group is present) to 1 (meaning an equal proportion of all five groups is present). The diversity score for the United States in 2010 is 0.60. The diversity score for the San Francisco Bay Region is 0.84. Within the region, Solano (0.89) and Alameda (0.90) Counties are the most diverse and the remaining North Bay (0.55 - 0.64) Counties are the least diverse.