Download
slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Authors: Kari K. Clark and David L. Kinyon Presenter: Ruth E. Detlefsen Service Sector Statistics Division U.S. Census B PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Authors: Kari K. Clark and David L. Kinyon Presenter: Ruth E. Detlefsen Service Sector Statistics Division U.S. Census B

Authors: Kari K. Clark and David L. Kinyon Presenter: Ruth E. Detlefsen Service Sector Statistics Division U.S. Census B

102 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Authors: Kari K. Clark and David L. Kinyon Presenter: Ruth E. Detlefsen Service Sector Statistics Division U.S. Census B

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Can We Continue to Exclude Small Single-Establishment Businesses from Data Collection in the Annual Retail Trade Survey and the Service Annual Survey? Authors: Kari K. Clark and David L. Kinyon Presenter: Ruth E. Detlefsen Service Sector Statistics Division U.S. Census Bureau

  2. The Surveys • Annual Retail Trade Survey (ARTS) • Sales • Sales tax • Inventories • Purchases • E-commerce sales • Service Annual Survey (SAS) • Total and detailed revenue • Total and detailed expenses • E-commerce revenue

  3. Why Exclude Small Single-Establishment Businesses? • To Reduce: • Respondent Burden • Data Collection Costs

  4. Restricted Data Collection - Industries • Couriers & Messengers (NAICS 492) • Warehousing & Storage (NAICS 493) • Rental & Leasing Services (NAICS 532) • Professional, Scientific, & Technical Services (NAICS 54) except Computer Systems Design & Related Services (NAICS 5415) • Administrative & Support Services (NAICS 561) • Waste Management & Remediation Services (NAICS 562) • Social Assistance (NAICS 624) • Arts, Entertainment, & Recreation (NAICS 71) • Accommodation & Food Services (NAICS 72)* • Other Services (except Public Administration) (NAICS 81)

  5. Methodology for 1999 SAS and 2000 ARTS Cutoff was calculated by: • Summing payroll of all multi-establishments • Adding the payroll of single-establishments: • One at a time, beginning with the largest • Stop when sum is at least 80% of the total payroll • Cutoff = payroll of last single-establishment added

  6. Evaluation Results • Units withheld from mailing contributed: • 9% of the SAS revenue estimate for all restricted data collection industries • 17% of the sales estimate for NAICS 72 within ARTS.

  7. 2005 ARTS and SAS • Re-examined methodology due to: • Addition of detailed items • More current data

  8. Changes to Cutoff Methodology • Source of Data • Input Data • Level of Industry Classification • Treatment of New Businesses • Evaluation Method

  9. Source of Data • Establishment List for Sample Revision • Used to develop the new sample introduced for the 2005 surveys • Includes establishments not active at the time of the Economic Census • 2003 administrative data available for use

  10. Input Data • Measure of Size (MOS) instead of Payroll • MOS ≈ Annual Revenue, based on 2003 data • MOS is expected to be well-correlated with variables measured in the surveys

  11. Level of Industry Classification • Levels Used for Sampling instead of NAICS • Generally 4-, 5-, 6-digit NAICS

  12. Treatment of New Businesses • Start date between 04/01/03 and 01/01/04 • Treated similarly to multi-establishments

  13. Evaluation Method • Used 70%, 80%, 90% of Total MOS • Considered varying by industry level

  14. Calculating the Cutoffs within Each Industry • Total MOS for Multi-establishments and Births • Add non-birth single establishments until percent of total was met or exceeded • Cutoff is MOS of last unit added

  15. Example of Calculating the Cutoffs • Sum of Multi-estabs = 500,000 • Sum of Births = 25,000 • Total (Starting Cumulation) = 525,000 • Sum of Non-births = 350,000 • Grand Total = 875,000

  16. Example of Calculating the Cutoffs (cont) Cutoff 100,000 25,000 5,000

  17. Choosing the Cutoffs for 2005 • Computed cutoffs for the 3 percentages • Applied cutoffs to 2003 Annual Surveys • Compared sales/revenue to the 3 cutoffs for small single establishments • If below cutoff, data was cleared and imputed • Recomputed estimates

  18. Evaluation Criteria • Coefficient of Variation <= 20% • Imputation Rate <= 40% • Large Changes?

  19. Evaluation of SAS Estimates • Cutoffs based on 70% had a considerable impact on estimates • Only cutoffs based on 80% and 90% were examined in depth: • revenue or expenses would not be published for some industries • majority of the detail items would not be published

  20. Final Recommendation for SAS • Mail all units for SAS • The cutoffs have a considerable impact on the estimates • New detail items were to be added to the 2005 SAS

  21. Evaluation of ARTS Estimates • Cutoffs based on 80% and 90% • Criteria met for previously published industries

  22. Final Recommendation for ARTS • Restricted data collection will continue for industries within NAICS 72. • Applied cutoffs based on 90% • 1,339 not mailed out of 5,677 total sampling units

  23. Can We Continue to Exclude Small Single-Establishment Businesses from Data Collection in the Annual Retail Trade Survey and the Service Annual Survey? • For ARTS – Yes • For SAS – No

  24. Thank You • Contact Information: • Kari K. Clark • kari.k.clark@census.gov • David L. Kinyon david.l.kinyon@census.gov • Ruth E. Detlefsen • ruth.e.detlefsen@census.gov