Impact of intercensal population projections and error of closure on breast cancer surveillance: examples from 10 California counties

INTRODUCTION: In 2001, data from the California Cancer Registry suggested that breast cancer incidence rates among non-Hispanic white (nHW) women in Marin County, California, had increased almost 60% between 1991 and 1999. This analysis examines the extent to which these and other breast cancer incidence trends could have been impacted by bias in intercensal population projections. METHOD: We obtained population projections for the year 2000 projected from the 1990 census from the California Department of Finance (DOF) and population counts from the 2000 US Census for nHW women living in 10 California counties and quantified age-specific differences in counts. We also computed age-adjusted incidence rates of invasive breast cancer in order to examine and quantify the impact of differences between the population data sources. RESULTS: Differences between year 2000 DOF projections and year 2000 census counts varied by county and age and ranged from underestimates of 60% to overestimates of 64%. For Marin County, the DOF underestimated the number of nHW women aged 45 to 64 years by 32% compared to the 2000 US census. This difference produced a significant 22% discrepancy between breast cancer incidence rates calculated using the two population data sources. In Los Angeles and Santa Clara counties, DOF-based incidence rates were significantly lower than rates based on census data. Rates did not differ significantly by population data source in the remaining seven counties examined. CONCLUSION: Although year 2000 population estimates from the DOF did not differ markedly from census counts at the state or county levels, greater discrepancies were observed for race-stratified, age-specific groups within counties. Because breast cancer incidence rates must be calculated with age-specific data, differences between population data sources at the age-race level may lead to mis-estimation of breast cancer incidence rates in county populations affected by these differences, as was observed in Marin County. Although intercensal rates based on population projections are important for timely breast cancer surveillance, these rates are prone to bias due to the error of closure between population projections and decennial census population counts. Intercensal rates should be interpreted with this potential bias in mind

State Mandates, Housing Elements, and Low-income Housing Production

In order to create low-income housing opportunities and mitigate exclusionary zoning, in 1968 Congress mandated that municipalities receiving comprehensive planning funds must create a housing element. In tandem, many states mandated that municipal housing elements must accommodate low-income housing needs. After examining empirical research for California, Florida, Illinois, and Minnesota, this review found aspirational success because those states rewarded the municipal planning process. In order to increase low-income housing, this review argues for state housing policy reform. Under US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s revised fair housing rule, which requires an assessment of local data, states can no longer ignore the exclusionary behavior of municipalities

Comment letters to the National Commission on Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting, 1987 (Treadway Commission) Vol. 2

https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_sop/1662/thumbnail.jp

State of California budget.

Mode of access: Internet

Budget submitted to the California legislature.

Other slight variations in title.Period covered by report ends June 30.Mode of access: Internet.Prepared 19 by the State Board of Control and State Controller; 19 by Dept. of Finance, Division of Budgets and Accounts.Superseded by its Support and local assistance budget and its Capital outlay budget submitted to the California Legislature

Financial aid and for-profit colleges: Does aid encourage entry?

Concerns over rising college tuition and slow economic growth have brought renewed attention to the role of federal and state financial aid programs in opening access to education. Despite a large body of literature examining the effects of grant aid on four-year and public two-year college enrollment, for-profit colleges-particularly the vast majority that offer two-year degrees and certificates-have largely been ignored. Using panel data methods and a new administrative data set of for-profit colleges operating in California between 1989 and 2003, I assess the impact of the federal Pell Grant program, the G.I. Bill, and California's Cal Grant program on the net number of for-profit colleges per county. The results suggest that for both Pell and Cal Grants, increases in the per-student maximum award encourage for-profit entry. This relationship is particularly strong in counties with high adult poverty levels, where more students are eligible for aid. Further, these gains in the private sector do not appear to come at the expense of the public sector. Rather, public community colleges also experience enrollment gains as the generosity of Pell and Cal Grants increases, although this reaction appears to be weaker than the reaction of for-profits. © 2010 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.