c2010sr-03

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

1/24

2010 Census Special Reports

U.S. Department o CommerceEconomics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

census.gov

Centenarians: 2010

Issued December 2012C2010SR-03

By Julie Meyer

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

2/24

This report was prepared by Julie Meyer, Statistician, Age and

Special Populations Branch, under the general direction oAmy

Symens Smith, Chie o the Age and Special Populations Branch,

and Karen Humes, Assistant Division Chie or Special Population

Statistics, Population Division. Enrique Lamas, Associate Director

or Demographic Programs, and Nancy Potok, Deputy Director and

Chie Operating Oicer at the U.S. Census Bureau, provided overall

direction.

Special thanks are extended to many individuals involved in the cre-

ation and review o the report. Charles Holmberg, Age and Special

Populations Branch, prepared the maps. Janet Wysocki, Census

Activities and Tabulation Sta, Brian Kincel, Age and Special Popula-

tions Branch, and Benjamin Bolender, Population Estimates Branch,

Population Division, provided data assistance. Extensive review and

comments were provided by Frank Hobbs, Population Division.

Additional comments were provided by J. Gregory Robinson, Spe-

cial Assistant, Population Division, and Victoria Velkoff, Assistant

Division Chie or Population Estimates and Projections. Principal sta-

tistical assistance was provided by Patrick Cantwell and Richard

Griffin o the Decennial Statistical Studies Division, with additionalreview by James Dinwiddie o the Decennial Management Division.

Editorial comments were provided by Marjorie Hanson. Addition-

ally, the late Gregory Spencer provided valuable mentorship on

centenarian data quality analysis, which provided the oundation or

the data quality section in this report.

Coordination o the project within Population Division was pro-

vided by Julie VanEerden. Linda Chen, Amanda Perry, and Joel

Pugatsky, o the Administrative and Customer Services Division,

Francis Grailand Hall, Chie, provided publications and printing

management, graphics design and composition, and editorial review

or print and electronic media. General direction and production

management were provided by Claudette E. Bennett, Assistant

Division Chie. Melanie Deal in the Public Inormation Oice coordi-

nated the public release o this product.

Acknowledgments

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

3/24

U.S. Department of CommerceRebecca M. Blank,

Acting Secretary

Rebecca M. Blank,Deputy Secretary

Economics and Statistics AdministrationVacant,

Under Secretaryor Economic Aairs

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Thomas L. Mesenbourg,Acting Director

Centenarians: 2010 Issued December 2012C2010SR-03

2010 Census Special Reports

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

4/24

ECONOMICS

AND STATISTICS

ADMINISTRATION

Economics

and Statistics

Administration

Vacant,

Under Secretary or

Economic Aairs

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Thomas L. Mesenbourg,Acting Director

Nancy A. Potok,

Deputy Director and

Chie Operating Oicer

Enrique J. Lamas,

Associate Director

or Demographic Programs

Enrique J. Lamas,

Acting Chie, Population Division

SUGGESTED CITATION

U.S. Census Bureau,2010 Census Special Reports,

Centenarians: 2010,C2010SR-03,

U.S. Government Printing Oce,Washington, DC,

2012

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

5/24

Text

Introduction 1

Numbers, Proportions, and Trends Over Time 1

Characteristics 2

Sex 2

Race, Hispanic Origin, and Sex 3

Living Arrangements 4

Geographic Distribution 9

Data Quality 9

Source of Final Age Text Box 12

Conclusion 13

About the 2010 Census 13

For More Information 14

References 14

Tables

Table 1. Population by Race and Hispanic Origin or Selected Older

Age Groups: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Table 2. Population by Selected Older Age Group or the United States,

Regions, States, and Puerto Rico: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Table 3. Percent Distribution o Centenarian and Total Populations by

Source o Final Age: 2000 and 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Figures

Figure 1. Centenarians and Their Proportion o Total Population:1980 to 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Figure 2. Percent Change by Selected Older Age Group:

2000 to 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Figure 3. Percent Distribution by Sex and Sex Ratios or

Selected Older Age Groups: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Figure 4. Living Arrangements o Selected Older

Age-Sex Groups: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Figure 5. Sex by Selected Living Arrangement or

Centenarians: 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Figure 6. Living Arrangements o Centenarians by Race and

Hispanic Origin: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Figure 7. Race and Hispanic Origin by Selected Living Arrangement

or Centenarians: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Figure 8. Centenarians: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Figure 9. Comparison o Centenarian Population From

Alternative Sources: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Figure 10. Reproduction o the Question on Age and Date o

Birth From the 2010 Census . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Contents

U.S. Census Bureau Centenarians: 2010 iii

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

6/24

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

7/24

U.S. Census Bureau Centenarians: 2010 1

INTRODUCTION

Centenarians, or people aged

100 or older, are both rare and

distinct rom the rest o the older

population. This report provides an

updated portrait o the centenarian

population based on age, sex, race,

Hispanic origin, and living arrange-ments inormation collected during

the 2010 Census. It also describes

the geographic distribution o

this population. The characteristic

prole and geographic distribution

o centenarians are compared with

those o other age groups in the

older population to illustrate how

centenarians are distinct. Although

some comparisons over time are

included in this report, these are

limited due to variations in data

quality across censuses.

Any study o the centenarian popu-

lation must take into account data

quality issues, since they have in

the past, and continue to be, obsta-

cles to obtaining a clear picture o

this population. Examples o issues

aecting centenarian data include

deliberate age misreporting by the

respondent (e.g., age exaggeration),

orm or question design problems,

and misallocation o extreme agesduring data processing. In addi-

tion, the relatively small number

o people in a population, as is the

case with centenarians, can cause

data to be particularly sensitive to

these data issues. More inormation

describing centenarian data quality

is included at the end o this report.

NUMBERS, PROPORTIONS,AND TRENDS OVER TIME

Centenarians make up a very smallportion o the total population.

Figure 1 shows that, in 2010, there

were just 53,364 centenarians in

the United States, or 1.73 centenar-

ians per 10,000 people in the total

population. Even among the older

population, centenarians are rare. O

those aged 70 and older, only 0.19

percent (or 19 per 10,000) were

centenarians, while 6.5 percent

were in their 90s, 33.6 percent were

in their 80s, and 59.6 percent were

in their 70s.

The centenarian share o the total

population is smaller than that or

other developed countries. The

U.S. proportion, 1.73 centenarians

per 10,000 people, is lower than

the proportion in Sweden (1.92 per

10,000), the United Kingdom (1.95

per 10,000), and France (2.70 per

10,000) (Statistics Sweden, 2010;

Human Mortality Database, 2012).

The U.S. proportion is about hal

the level ound in Japan, 3.43 per

10,000 (Statistics Bureau o Japan,

2011).

In the period 1980 to 2010, the

centenarian population experi-

enced a larger percentage increase

than did the total population. The

number o centenarians increased

rom 32,194 to 53,364, resulting

in a 65.8 percent increase, while

the total population increased 36.3

percent. Consequently, the centenar-

ian share o the total U.S. population

increased rom 1.42 per 10,000 in

1980 to 1.73 per 10,000 in 2010.

Since 2000, census data showed a

modest 5.8 percent increase in cen-

tenarians, while the total population

increased 9.7 percent and those in

their 80s and 90s increased at much

higher rates (21.1 percent and 30.0

percent, respectively) (Figure 2).

As mentioned in the introduction,

data quality issues have aected

centenarian data in many ways

over time, making comparisons

o centenarians across censusesdicult. Analysis by Humes and

Velko (2007) concluded that the

Census 2000 centenarian count was

too high. Further analysis leading to

the 2010 Census indicated that the

elevated Census 2000 centenar-

ian count was impacted in great

measure by the amiliar combina-

tion o a specic census relationship

reporting error and an associated

error in the procedures that assign

an age to those with blank or invalidages by using that relationship

inormation (Spencer, 1987). New

diagnostic tools introduced during

the 2010 Census dress rehearsal in

2008 led to pinpointing and adjust-

ing the specic allocation proce-

dures involved in over-allocation o

extreme ages in order to minimize

Figure 1.Centenarians and Their Proportion of Total Population:1980 to 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, anddefinitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Proportion (per 10,000)Number

2010200019901980

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1; Census 2000 Summary File 1;1990 Census of Population, General Population Characteristics, United States (1990 CP-1-1);1980 Census of Population, General Population Characteristics, United States (1980 CP-1-1).

32,194

1.421.50

1.79 1.73

37,306

50,45453,364

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

8/24

2 Centenarians: 2010 U.S. Census Bureau

the eect on the centenarian

population in 2010. Since these

procedures were improved or the

2010 Census, this inconsistency o

procedure between the censuses

resulted in the appearance o a rela-

tively small increase o 5.8 percent

shown or the centenarian popula-

tion between 2000 and 2010. The

actual change was likely larger.

To account or this quality issue and

obtain a better picture o change

or the centenarian population

over the past decade, data rom

only the respondents reporting

high-quality age and date o birth

inormation (i.e., those respondents

who reported a consistent age and

date o birth on their census orm)

were compared.1

This comparisonshowed that centenarians with

1 For Census 2000, consistent age anddate o birth data is dened as the conditionwhen the dierence between the reported ageand the age calculated rom the reported dateo birth is ewer than 4 years. For the 2010Census, consistent age and date o birth datais dened more strictly as the condition whenthe dierence between the reported age andthe age calculated rom the reported date obirth is ewer than 2 years.

these highest quality age and date

o birth data increased by 28.4

percent between 2000 and 2010.

This percentage increase was simi-

lar to that o other age groups in

the older population. It was lower

than the 32.0 percent increase or

people in their 90s, higher than the

22.5 percent increase or people in

their 80s, and much higher than the

1.9 percent increase or those in

their 70s.2

CHARACTERISTICS

Centenarians are concentrated in

the youngest centenarian ages.

In 2010, over hal (62.5 percent) o

the 53,364 centenarians were age

100 or 101. Ninety-two percent

were 100 to 104 years old. This

is consistent with the average

lie expectancy or people age

100, which was 2.4 years in 2010

(Murphy et al., 2012). Super-

centenarians, those 110 years or

2 Percent growth o a given age groupis also driven by the size o the populationaging into that age group.

older, numbered 330 nationwide

or just 0.6 percent o the cen-

tenarian population. Caution is

recommended when interpreting

data or super-centenarians since

data quality generally declines as

age increases within the centenar-

ian age category. (See data quality

discussion later in this report.)

Sex

Due to sex dierences in mortality

over the liespan, the proportion o

emales in the population increases

with age. This is especially true in

the oldest ages, where the percent-

age emale increases sharply (Figure

3). In 2010, 55.3 percent o those in

their 70s were emale, 61.9 percent

o those in their 80s were emale,

72.2 percent o those in their 90s

were emale, and 82.8 percent o

centenarians were emale.

The sex ratio is a measure that

describes the balance o males

and emales in a population. It

represents the number o males per

100 emales. A sex ratio above 100

Figure 2.

Percent Change by Selected Older Age Group: 2000 to 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Consistent age and date of birth casesTotal

100 years and over90 to 99 years80 to 89 years70 to 79 years

2.0 1.9

21.122.5

30.0

5.8

28.4

32.0

Note: For Census 2000, consistent age and date of birth data is defined as the condition when the difference between the reported ageand the age calculated from the reported date of birth is fewer than 4 years. For the 2010 Census, consistent age and date of birth data

is defined more strictly as the condition when the difference between the reported age and the age calculated from the reported date ofbirth is fewer than 2 years.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010 Census unpublished tabulations.

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

9/24


indicates more males than emales

in a population. A sex ratio below

100 indicates more emales than

males in a population. Figure 3

shows that or those in their 70s,

the sex ratio was 81.0 males per

100 emales. For those in their 80s,

it was 61.6 males per 100 emales.

For those in their 90s, the sex ratio

dropped to 38.6 males per 100

emales. For every 100 centenar-

ian emales, there were only 20.7

centenarian males.

Race, Hispanic Origin, and Sex3

The 2010 Census shows that cen-

tenarians are less diverse than the

3The Revisions to the Standards or theClassifcation o Federal Data on Race andEthnicity, issued by the Oce o Management

and Budget (OMB) in 1997, is available at. OMB requires ederalagencies to use a minimum o two ethnicities:Hispanic or Latino and Not Hispanic or Latino.Hispanic origin can be viewed as the heritage,nationality group, lineage, or country o birtho the person or the persons parents or ances-tors beore their arrival in the United States.People who identiy their origin as Hispanic,Latino, or Spanish may be any race. Hispanicor Latino reers to a person o Cuban,Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or CentralAmerican, or other Spanish culture or originregardless o race.

total U.S. population. In 2010, 82.5

percent o centenarians were White

alone, compared with 72.4 percent

White alone in the total population

(Table 1).4 O the centenarian popu-

lation, 12.2 percent were Black or

Arican American alone, compared

with 12.6 percent in the total popu-

lation.5 The Asian alone share o

the centenarian population was 2.5

percent, while its share o the total

population was 4.8 percent. Those

who were Some Other Race alone in

2010 made up 1.3 percent o cente-

narians but 6.2 percent o the total

population. Those answering Two

or More Races in the 2010 Census

constituted 1.0 percent o the cen-

tenarian population, but 2.9 percent

o the total population. Those who

were American Indian and Alaska

4 As a matter o policy, the Census Bureaudoes not advocate the use o the alonepopulation over the alone-or-in-combinationpopulation or vice versa. The use o the alonepopulation in this report does not imply that itis a preerred method o presenting or analyz-ing data. Data on race rom the 2010 Censuscan be presented and discussed in a varietyo ways.

5 The terms Black or Arican Americanand Black are used interchangeably inthis report.

Native alone made up 0.5 percent

o centenarians, while this group

constituted 0.9 percent in the total

population. O the population 100

and older, 0.1 percent was Native

Hawaiian and Other Pacic Islander

alone, while this group made up

0.2 percent o the total population.

Among centenarians, 5.8 percent

were Hispanic. O the total popula-

tion, the percentage Hispanic was

16.3 percent.

Even among age groups within the

older population, in general, as age

increases, the population becomes

less diverse with an increasing

percentage in each age group o

the older population that is White

alone and not Hispanic. This pat-

tern establishes itsel or those intheir 70s, 80s, and 90s. However,

there is a departure rom this pat-

tern or centenarians. For example,

o people in their 70s, 84.1 percent

were White alone. This increases to

87.6 percent among those in their

80s and 88.5 percent among those

in their 90s. For centenarians, the

percentage White alone decreases

Figure 3.Percent Distribution by Sex and Sex Ratios for Selected Older Age Groups: 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010

/doc/sf1.pdf)

Percent male Percent female Males per 100 females

100 years and over90 to 99 years80 to 89 years70 to 79 years

44.7

55.3

38.1

61.9

38.6

72.2

27.820.7

17.2

82.8

61.6

81.0

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1.

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

10/24


to 82.5 percent. The opposite pat-

tern exists or the other race groups

and Hispanics. There is a decreasein percentage or these groups

as age increases. For example,

the percent Black alone was 8.9

percent or those in their 70s. It

decreases to 7.1 percent or those

in their 80s, and increases slightly

to 7.2 percent or those in their

90s. The percentage Black alone

or centenarians increases to 12.2

percent. Similarly, the percentage

Hispanic among those in their 70s

is 7.3 percent. This decreases to 5.7percent or those in their 80s, and

4.5 percent or those in their 90s.

The percent Hispanic increases to

5.8 percent or centenarians. This

anomalous result or centenarians

is, in part, likely due to data qual-

ity issues. To shed light on these

inconsistencies or centenarians, a

brie comparison with Census 2000

data may be useul.

Since this decades centenar-

ian population is essentially thesurviving portion o last decades

nonagenarians, an examination

o the race and Hispanic-origin

composition or people in their

90s in Census 2000 can aid in

interpretation. For people in their

90s in Census 2000, the percent

White alone was 89.0 percent, the

percent Black alone was 7.7 per-

cent, and the percent Hispanic was

3.5 percent. Additionally, in Census2000, a similar abrupt break in the

pattern o race and Hispanic-origin

composition appears uniquely or

centenarians.

Given the marked shit in composi-

tion or centenarians in 2010 as

well as the inconsistent composi-

tion or this same group o people

in the prior census when they were

in their 90s, the anomalous nd-

ings or centenarians are likely due

more to data quality issues than

an actual unique racial and ethnic

diversity among centenarians. (See

the data quality discussion later in

this report.) The race and Hispanic-

origin composition or the centenar-

ian population is likely similar to the

composition or those in their 90s.

Sex ratios or centenarians di-

ered signicantly across race and

Hispanic origin groups. The race

groups with the highest sex ratios

were also those with extremely

small numbers o centenarians.

This is true especially or the Native

Hawaiian and Other Pacic Islander

alone population, which had 44

centenarians nationwide (76.0 cen-

tenarian males per 100 centenarian

emales) and the American Indian

and Alaska Native alone popula-

tion, which had 255 centenarians

(65.6 centenarian males per 100centenarian emales). Because o

the small numbers, one should

be cautious when interpreting

data or these groups. Those with

the next highest sex ratios were

centenarians reporting Some Other

Race alone or Two or More Races,

which had around 50 centenarian

males per 100 centenarian emales

each. The Asian alone population

was the race group with the next

highest sex ratio, 39.1 centenarianmales per 100 centenarian emales.

The Black alone and White alone

populations had the lowest cente-

narian sex ratios among the race

groups. The Black alone centenarian

population had 21.3 males per 100

emales, while the White alone cen-

tenarian population had 19.3 males

per 100 emales. Hispanic centenar-

ians had a relatively high sex ratio

o 41.6 males per 100 emales,

while non-Hispanic centenarians

had a sex ratio o 19.6 males per

100 emales.

Living Arrangements

As people get older, the likeli-

hood o widowhood and disability

increases, and living arrangements

change as a result. A comparison

Table 1.

Population by Race and Hispanic Origin for Selected Older Age Groups: 2010(For inormation on confdentiality protection, nonsampling error, and defnitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Race and Hispanic originTotal population 70 to 79 years 80 to 89 years 90 to 99 years 100 years and over

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Total population 308,745,538 1000 16,595,961 1000 9,363,786 1000 1,819,610 1000 53,364 1000RACEOne Race 299,736,465 971 16,426,479 990 9,288,661 992 1,807,321 993 52,816 990

White 223,553,265 724 13,965,501 841 8,206,290 876 1,610,445 885 43,999 825Black or Arican American 38,929,319 126 1,469,106 89 669,471 71 130,727 72 6,516 122American Indian and Alaska Native 2,932,248 09 89,194 05 33,325 04 5,207 03 255 05Asian 14,674,252 48 605,478 36 262,015 28 43,482 24 1,324 25Native Hawaiian and Other

Pacifc Islander 540,013 02 13,512 01 4,840 01 747 44 01Some Other Race 19,107,368 62 283,688 17 112,720 12 16,713 09 678 13

Two or More Races 9,009,073 29 169,482 10 75,125 08 12,289 07 548 10

HISPANIC OR LATINOHispanic or Latino 50,477,594 163 1,210,950 73 536,916 57 82,093 45 3,089 58Not Hispanic or Latino 258,267,944 837 15,385,011 927 8,826,870 943 1,737,517 955 50,275 942

Percentage rounds to 00

Source: US Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

11/24


across the older age groups

illustrates this and is presented inFigure 4. In 2010, the majority o

people in their 70s were living with

others in a household, especially

males (81.5 percent o males and

65.9 percent o emales). However,

as age increases, a mix o living

arrangements becomes apparent.

Most people in their 80s were living

at home, although the situation

was dierent or men and women.

Women were about equally likely

to be living at home alone (46.0percent) as they were to be living

at home with others (46.2 percent).

Men in their 80s, on the other

hand, were much more likely to be

living in a household with others

(71.4 percent) than living alone at

home (23.7 percent). O people in

their 90s, there was a noticeable

percentage living in nursing homes

(10.9 percent or males and 19.2percent or emales). Still, the

women in this age group were

likeliest to live alone at home (47.6

percent), while the majority o men

in this age group were living at

home with others (54.7 percent).

Centenarian emales were slightly

more likely to live in a nursing

home (35.2 percent) than alone at

home (34.0 percent). Centenarian

males, however, were still most

likely to be living with others in ahousehold (43.5 percent) than any

other living arrangement. About the

same percentage o male centenar-

ians as emale centenarians lived

alone in the home (33.3 percent

and 34.0 percent, respectively).

The sex distribution o centenarians

varies across living arrangements

(Figure 5). Overall, the percentage

emale among centenarians was82.8 percent. However, centenar-

ians living with others in a house-

hold were only 76.0 percent emale

while centenarians living in nursing

homes were 90.3 percent emale.

Those living alone in the household

were 83.1 percent emale. Some o

these dierences may arise rom

variation in widowhood and disabil-

ity in the population by sex.

A comparison o centenarian liv-

ing arrangements across race and

Hispanic-origin groups shows con-

siderable dierences in the living

arrangements o each groups oldest

members (Figure 6). Centenarians

who are White alone or non-

Hispanic had the highest likelihood

o living alone (36.4 percent and

35.0 percent, respectively), while

Figure 4.Living Arrangements of Selected Older Age-Sex Groups: 2010

(In percent. For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov

/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Other group quartersNursing homeAlone in householdWith others in household

FemalesMalesFemalesMalesFemalesMalesFemalesMales

81.5

65.9 71.4

46.2

46.0

23.731.9

16.6

33.4

54.7

47.6

31.6

10.97.1

0.70.5 1.0 1.6

4.31.8

0.30.4

1.4

34.0

43.5

28.5

33.3

18.235.2

5.1 2.3

19.2

Notes: A group quarters is a place where people live or stay, in a group living arrangement, that is owned or managed by an entity ororganization providing housing and/or services for residents.Percentages may not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census unpublished tabulation.

70 to 79 years 80 to 89 years 90 to 99 years 100 years and over

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

12/24


centenarians reporting Some Other

Race alone, Hispanic, or Asian alone

were the least likely to be living

alone in the home (14.5 percent,

16.6 percent, and 19.0 percent,

respectively). Centenarians with

the highest likelihood o living with

others in households were Some

Other Race alone (74.2 percent),

Hispanic (66.8 percent), and Ameri-

can Indian and Alaska Native alone

(64.7 percent). The groups with the

lowest percentage who were living

with others in the household were

White alone (26.4 percent) and Not

Hispanic (28.9 percent). The groups

with the highest percentage living

in a nursing home were White alone

Not Hispanic

Hispanic

Two orMore Races

SOR alone

NHPI alone

Asian alone

AIAN alone

Black alone

White alone

All

Figure 6.Living Arrangements of Centenarians by Race and Hispanic Origin: 2010(In percent. For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov


33.9 32.3 2.8

2.9

2.3

1.6

2.8

2.3

1.5

1.8

2.3

2.8

Other group quartersNursing homeWith others in household Alone in household

31.1

36.426.4 34.3

23.147.8 26.9

24.364.7 9.4

19.061.2 17.0

20.561.4 15.9

9.974.2 14.5

24.159.9 14.2

16.666.8 14.3

35.028.9 33.4

Notes: A group quarters is a place where people live or stay, in a group living arrangement, that is owned or managed by an entity ororganization providing housing and/or services for residents.Black refers to Black or African American; AIAN refers to American Indian and Alaska Native; NHPI refers to Native Hawaiian and OtherPacific Islander; SOR refers to Some Other Race.Percentages may not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.


With others inhousehold

Alone inhousehold

Nursing home

All

Figure 5.Sex by Selected Living Arrangement for Centenarians: 2010



83.1

76.0

82.8

90.3

FemaleMale

17.2

9.7

16.9

24.0


7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

13/24


(34.3 percent) and Not Hispanic

(33.4 percent). The groups with the

lowest percentage o centenarians

living in nursing homes were Ameri-

can Indian and Alaska Native alone

(9.4 percent) and Some Other Race

alone (9.9 percent).

The race distribution o centenar-ians varies across living arrange-

ments. Generally, centenarians

living with others in households

were a more racially diverse popula-

tion than centenarians living alone

in households and those living in

nursing homes (Figure 7). Among

those centenarians living with oth-

ers in households, 70.2 percent

were White alone, 18.8 percent were

Black alone, and 4.9 percent were

Asian alone. In contrast, among

those centenarians living alone,

88.6 percent were White alone, 8.3

percent were Black alone, and 1.4

percent were Asian alone. Among

those living in nursing homes, 87.5

percent were White alone, 10.2

percent were Black alone, and 1.3

percent were Asian alone.

Comparisons o centenarians across

selected living arrangements also

shows a noticeably larger per-centage Hispanic among those

centenarians living with others in

households (12.4 percent) than

Figure 7.Race and Hispanic Origin by Selected Living Arrangement for Centenarians: 2010



82.817.224.0

With others

in household

Alone inhousehold

Nursing home

All 12.2

8.3

18.8 4.970.2

88.6

10.2

82.5

87.5

82.817.224.0

With othersin household

Alone inhousehold

Nursing home

All 5.8

87.6

97.22.8

12.4

94.2

2.6 97.4

RACE

HISPANIC ORIGIN

Note: Black refers to Black or African American; AIAN refers to American Indian and Alaska Native; NHPI refers to Native Hawaiian andOther Pacific Islander; SOR refers to Some Other Race.


Two or More RacesNHPI aloneWhite alone AIAN alone SOR aloneAsian aloneBlack alone

Not HispanicHispanic

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

14/24


Table 2.

Population by Selected Older Age Group for the United States, Regions, States, andPuerto Rico: 2010(For inormation on confdentiality protection, nonsampling error, and defnitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

AreaTotal 70 to 79 years 80 to 89 years 90 to 99 years 100 years and over

Number Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

United States 308,745,538 16,595,961 54 9,363,786 30 1,819,610 059 53,364 00173

RegionNortheast 55,317,240 3,128,472 57 1,971,291 36 407,519 074 12,244 00221Midwest 66,927,001 3,678,562 55 2,195,247 33 448,229 067 13,112 00196South 114,555,744 6,280,049 55 3,255,625 28 584,533 051 17,444 00152West 71,945,553 3,508,878 49 1,941,623 27 379,329 053 10,564 00147

StateAlabama 4,779,736 283,700 59 139,515 29 24,181 051 759 00159Alaska 710,231 22,040 31 9,258 13 1,398 020 40 00056Arizona 6,392,017 377,287 59 188,529 29 32,317 051 832 00130Arkansas 2,915,918 178,976 61 89,968 31 17,090 059 580 00199Caliornia 37,253,956 1,738,749 47 1,000,475 27 197,811 053 5,921 00159

Colorado 5,029,196 224,376 45 119,141 24 23,023 046 593 00118Connecticut 3,574,097 194,915 55 131,224 37 30,209 085 930 00260Delaware 897,934 54,529 61 27,708 31 5,085 057 146 00163District o Columbia 601,723 27,301 45 16,201 27 3,663 061 156 00259Florida 18,801,310 1,384,221 74 772,905 41 139,153 074 4,090 00218

Georgia 9,687,653 433,157 45 204,451 21 37,279 038 1,141 00118Hawaii 1,360,301 76,028 56 49,464 36 10,170 075 306 00225Idaho 1,567,582 80,384 51 42,051 27 8,585 055 220 00140Illinois 12,830,632 653,860 51 388,169 30 79,705 062 2,419 00189Indiana 6,483,802 345,121 53 197,754 30 38,093 059 1,083 00167

Iowa 3,046,355 183,678 60 117,253 38 26,746 088 846 00278Kansas 2,853,118 152,100 53 94,892 33 20,743 073 626 00219Kentucky 4,339,367 245,042 56 125,100 29 21,825 050 596 00137Louisiana 4,533,372 236,505 52 121,662 27 20,731 046 594 00131Maine 1,328,361 86,531 65 49,571 37 9,666 073 298 00224

Maryland 5,773,552 284,340 49 163,351 28 32,444 056 911 00158Massachusetts 6,547,629 354,593 54 231,894 35 50,258 077 1,520 00232Michigan 9,883,640 550,169 56 327,790 33 63,217 064 1,729 00175Minnesota 5,303,925 273,971 52 166,972 31 38,397 072 1,211 00228Mississippi 2,967,297 163,822 55 80,849 27 14,671 049 542 00183

Missouri 5,988,927 348,708 58 193,616 32 37,751 063 1,166 00195

Montana 989,415 59,823 60 33,148 34 7,040 071 175 00177Nebraska 1,826,341 100,727 55 62,714 34 13,901 076 501 00274Nevada 2,700,551 139,783 52 59,946 22 8,926 033 203 00075New Hampshire 1,316,470 71,360 54 41,038 31 8,462 064 232 00176

New Jersey 8,791,894 476,177 54 296,548 34 60,527 069 1,769 00201New Mexico 2,059,179 116,134 56 57,860 28 10,087 049 284 00138New York 19,378,102 1,062,198 55 644,187 33 133,742 069 4,605 00238North Carolina 9,535,483 518,198 54 264,261 28 47,192 049 1,404 00147North Dakota 672,591 39,213 58 25,731 38 6,284 093 221 00329

Ohio 11,536,504 668,889 58 397,707 34 74,664 065 1,891 00164Oklahoma 3,751,351 216,126 58 110,924 30 19,726 053 546 00146Oregon 3,831,074 211,795 55 124,365 32 26,849 070 677 00177Pennsylvania 12,702,379 788,868 62 513,878 40 101,049 080 2,510 00198Rhode Island 1,052,567 57,722 55 41,960 40 9,150 087 247 00235

South Carolina 4,625,364 266,730 58 126,778 27 22,146 048 659 00142South Dakota 814,180 47,407 58 29,985 37 7,005 086 240 00295

Tennessee 6,346,105 361,053 57 178,931 28 32,000 050 940 00148Texas 25,145,561 1,096,401 44 552,707 22 96,761 038 2,917 00116Utah 2,763,885 104,579 38 55,303 20 9,914 036 186 00067

Vermont 625,741 36,108 58 20,991 34 4,456 071 133 00213Virginia 8,001,024 403,431 50 212,553 27 39,461 049 1,190 00149Washington 6,724,540 328,814 49 186,952 28 40,382 060 1,055 00157West Virginia 1,852,994 126,517 68 67,761 37 11,125 060 273 00147Wisconsin 5,686,986 314,719 55 192,664 34 41,723 073 1,179 00207Wyoming 563,626 29,086 52 15,131 27 2,827 050 72 00128

Puerto Rico 3,725,789 236,991 64 106,942 29 21,693 058 961 00258

Source: US Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

15/24


those living alone (2.8 percent) and

those living in a nursing home (2.6

percent).

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION

Comparing geographic patterns o

age groups among the population

70 and over provides some inor-mation about where people are liv-

ing as they age. According to 2010

Census data, there is an increasing

tendency toward living in an urban

area as one ages. 6 Among those

aged 70 and over, centenarians are

the likeliest to live in an urban area.

Around 85.7 percent o the cente-

narian population lived in an urban

area in 2010, compared with 84.2

percent o those in their 90s, 81.5

percent o those in their 80s, and

76.6 percent o those in their 70s.

A comparison among regions shows

that while the West ranked second

among the our regions when

ranking on the total population,

it ranked last among the regions

6 Census Bureaus Urban and Rural Clas-sication: The Census Bureaus urban areasrepresent densely developed territory andencompass residential, commercial, and othernonresidential urban land uses. The CensusBureau identies two types o urban areas:urbanized areas o 50,000 or more peopleand urban clusters o at least 2,500 andewer than 50,000 people. Rural encom-passes all population, housing, and terri-tory not included within an urban area. TheCensus Bureaus urban and rural classicationprovides an important baseline or analyzingchanges in the distribution and characteristicso urban and rural populations. The CensusBureaus urban areas also orm the cores ometropolitan and micropolitan statisticalareas, as dened by the Oce o Managementand Budget, and they are used in other agen-cies and organizations urban and rural classi-cations. More inormation about the CensusBureaus Urban-Rural Classicationincludingthe criteria used to delineate urban areas, listso urbanized areas and urban clusters, maps,and les providing relationships with othergeographic areascan be ound on theCensus Bureaus Web site at .

or number o centenarians. 7 The

region with the most centenarians

was the South (17,444), ollowed

by the Midwest (13,112), Northeast

(12,244), and West (10,564).

A comparison o states according to

the size o their centenarian popula-

tions shows that states with thelargest total populations generally

also have the most centenarians.

Caliornia had the largest number

o centenarians (5,921) ollowed

by New York, Florida, and Texas.

Alaska had the ewest centenar-

ians (40) ollowed by Wyoming,

Vermont, and Delaware. See Table 2

and Figure 8 or inormation on all

the states.

Comparing regions on the share

o their populations made up ocentenarians shows which had

higher concentrations o centenar-

ians. The Northeast and Midwest

had proportions that were higher

than the national average o 1.73

per 10,000 people, while the West

and the South had proportions that

were lower.

Although the Northeast region

ranked highest overall, the

individual states with the larg-

est number o centenarians per

10,000 people were in the Midwest.

North Dakota was the only state

with more than 3 centenarians per

10,000 people in the state (3.29 per

10,000) ollowed by South Dakota,

Iowa, and Nebraska. Three states

had less than 1 centenarian per

10,000 people. All three were in the

7 The Northeast region includesConnecticut, Maine, Massachusetts,New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.The Midwest includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota,and Wisconsin. The South includes Alabama,Arkansas, Delaware, the District o Columbia,Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina,Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas,Virginia, and West Virginia. The West includesAlaska, Arizona, Caliornia, Colorado, Hawaii,Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico,Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.

West: Alaska, Utah, and Nevada. To

contrast this with rankings or other

age groups among the older popu-

lation, the states with the highest

percentage in their 70s were

Florida, West Virginia, and Maine.

The states with the lowest percent-

age in their 70s included Alaska

and Utah. The states with the high-

est percentage o those in their 80s

were Florida, Pennsylvania, and

Rhode Island. The state that stood

out as having a particularly low per-

centage o those in their 80s was

Alaska (1.3 percent). The state with

the highest percentage o those in

their 90s was North Dakota while

the state with the lowest percent-

age in their 90s was Alaska.

DATA QUALITY

Data quality issues have aected

census centenarian data or

decades (Siegel and Passel, 1976;

Spencer, 1987; Krach and Velko,

1999; Humes and Velko, 2007).

The types o errors and the magni-

tude o their eect on centenarian

data have varied rom one census

to another. Types o error include

misreporting, orm design issues,

data capture or keying errors, and

processing errors.

Misreporting occurs when a respon-

dent does not answer the question

accurately. With respect to centenar-

ian data, it can result rom illiteracy,

cognition diculties, proxy report-

ing (i.e., response by someone

other than the person, such as a

neighbor or healthcare provider), or

simply a desire to attain the status

o being a centenarian.

Form design issues can also causemisreporting. They occur when the

question or overall census orm is

conusing to the respondent. For

example, in the 1970 Census, a

orm design that included FOSDIC

(i.e., Film Optical Sensing Device

or Input to Computers) circles

conused some respondents and

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

16/24


MT

AK

NM

OR MN

KS

SD

ND

MO

WA

FL

IL IN

WI NY

PA

MI

OH

IA

ME

MA

CT

AZ

HI

NV

TX

COCA

WY

UT

ID

NE

OK

GA

AR

AL

NC

MS

LA

TN

KYVA

SC

WV

RI

DEMDDC

NJ

Figure 8.

Centenarians: 2010

VT NH

U.S.: 53,364

Number

2,500 or more

1,500 to 2,499

500 to 1,499

Less than 500

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1.

PR

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions,

see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

MT

AK

NM

OR MN

KS

SD

ND

MO

WA

FL

IL IN

WI NY

PA

MI

OH

IA

ME

MA

CT

AZ

HI

NV

TX

COCA

WY

UT

ID

NE

OK

GA

AR

AL

NC

MS

LA

TN

KYVA

SC

WV

RI

DEMD

DC

NJ

VTNH

U.S.: 1.73 per 10,000

Per 10,000 state

population

2.50 or more

1.73 to 2.491.00 to 1.72

Less than 1.00

PR

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

17/24


led them to mark the incorrect

century or year o birth, resulting

in an unexpectedly large number

o people with centenarian ages in

that years census data (Siegel and

Passel, 1976).

Data capture or keying errors aectdata when the data keyer (i.e.,

a census employee who enters

census responses into a database)

or the automated data capture

program misinterprets or incor-

rectly records a census response.

In Census 2000, a ew centenarian

ages resulted when dates o birth

including months beginning with

the digit 1 (e.g., January, October,

or November) were reported bythe respondent in the age entry

box instead o the date o birth

entry boxes. For example, a person

may have written the date o birth

10-1-90 in the age entry area on

the orm. The automated capture

program would have interpreted

this as an age entry. Since the

capture system was designed to

record only the rst three digits o

an age response, it would then have

captured this response as a alse

centenarian with age 101 (Humes

and Velko, 2007).

Other issues occur during data edit-

ing and allocation procedures, which

clean and ill in missing inorma-

tion. Analysis o centenarian data

ater Census 2000 indicated that the

count o centenarians in 2000 was

artiicially high (Humes and Velko,

2007). This was due in large part to

the already-documented combina-

tion o a speciic relationship report-

ing error and procedures that based

age allocations on those misreported

relationship responses while main-

taining consistency o relationships

and ages among household mem-

bers (Spencer, 1987). As illustrated

in the examples above, many o the

data quality issues aecting cente-

narian data result rom a combina-

tion o the various types o errors

rather than just one type.

Early analysis o the 2010 centenar-

ian count indicates some consis-tency between the 2010 Census

centenarian number and estimates

rom other sources (Figure 9). The

2010 comparison data in Figure 9

range rom 52,800 (Kestenbaum

and Ferguson, 2005) to 68,361

(U.S. Census Bureau, 2012).8 The

2010 Census centenarian number,

53,364, is in the lower end o this

range.

Census data quality can be urther

described by using inormationprovided by the respondent to the

two-part census age and date o

birth question (Figure 10).

8 The U.S. Census Bureaus postcensal esti-mate is based on carrying Census 2000 dataorward to 2010. It does not refect the 2010Census results.

2010 Estimateby Kestenbaumand Ferguson

Vintage 2010Estimates

2010 Census

Figure 9.

Comparison of Centenarian Population FromAlternative Sources: 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, anddefinitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Note: Numbers for the 2010 Census and Vintage 2010 Estimates refer to April 1, 2010.Estimates by Kestenbaum and Ferguson refer to January 1.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1, Vintage 2010 PostcensalEstimates; Kestenbaum and Ferguson, 2005.

53,364

68,361

52,800

Figure 10.Reproduction of the Question on Age and Date ofBirth From the 2010 Census(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and

definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census questionnaire.

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

18/24


Ideally, the 2010 Census centenar-ian and total populations should be

similar in the source and quality o

their age data. Any dierences may

give us insight into data quality

issues. Indeed, 89.2 percent o the

total population and 84.1 percent

o centenarians reported the high-

est quality age and date o birth

inormation on their census orm

in 2010 (Table 3). There are somedierences, however, or the other

categories. Centenarians were more

likely than the total population to

be assigned their age due to incom-

plete or inconsistent age and date

o birth reporting, 13.0 percent or

centenarians and 5.3 percent or

the total population. Centenarians

were less likely than the total

population to have had their age

allocated because they did not

respond or reported an invalid age,

1.9 percent or centenarians and

3.6 percent or the total population.

In Census 2000, there were more

dierences in age data quality

between the centenarian and totalpopulations. In 2000, only 69.3

percent o centenarian age data

came rom consistent age and date

o birth inormation reported on the

orm, compared with 89.9 percent

or the total population (Table 3).

Additionally, 18.1 percent o cente-

narians obtained their centenarian

age rom procedures that allocated

an age to respondents with a blank

or invalid census age on their cen-

sus orm, while just 3.7 percent othe total populations age responses

came rom this source. The Census

2000 centenarian age data, like the

2010 Census centenarian data, also

had a higher assignment rate (12.0

percent) than the total population

(5.2 percent).

The quality o centenarian age data

improved between 2000 and 2010.

Only 69.3 percent o the Census

2000 centenarian populations

age data came rom ully reportedand consistent age and date o

birth responses on the census

orm (Table 3).9 In 2010, this had

increased to 84.1 percent. This

9 This percentage would have been evenlower i we had used the two-year dierencequality measure that was used to evaluate the2010 census data. Consequently, the percent-age change between 2000 to 2010 wouldhave been even larger.

Table 3.

Percent Distribution of Centenarian and Total Populations by Source of Final Age:2000 and 2010(For inormation on confdentiality protection, nonsampling error, and defnitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Source o fnal age2000 2010

Total population Centenarians Total population Centenarians

Consistent as reported 899 693 892 841Assigned 52 120 53 130Allocated 37 181 36 19Substituted 12 06 19 10

Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010 Census unpublished tabulations

SOURCE OF FINAL AGE

CONSISTENTAS REPORTED

Reported age and calculated age rom reported

date o birth diered by ewer than two years

(ewer than our years in Census 2000). Ageresponses in this category are considered the

highest quality age responses.

ASSIGNED Incomplete or inconsistent age and date o

birth inormation was reported: an age without

a date o birth, a date o birth without an age, or

an inconsistent age and date o birth (i.e., age

and date-o-birth-implied age diered by two or

more years). Other inormation provided by the

respondent, such as household relationship, was

used to choose between inconsistent age and

date o birth.

ALLOCATED No valid age or date o birth inormation

was reported. Age was allocated rom

nearby households using the hot deck

method o allocation.

SUBSTITUTED Data were not reported or any person in the

household. The characteristics o people in

another household o the same size were dupli-

cated to ll in this households characteristics.

This inormation can be used as an evaluation tool that categorizes the

source and quality o census age responses into our main groups. See

text box.

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

19/24


rate or centenarians in 2010 has

become more consistent with that

or other age groups in the older

population. Another positive nding

is that age allocation rates declined

substantially between 2000 and

2010. An age may be assigned by

census allocation procedures when

a persons age is blank or invalid on

their census orm. In Census 2000,

18.1 percent o centenarian ages

were allocated. This declined to 1.9

percent in the 2010 Census.

The high allocation rate or cente-

narians in 2000 resulted rom the

combination o a census relation-

ship reporting error reerred to

as the generational inversion

reporting error and the errone-

ous use o this aulty relationshipvalue to allocate an age or this

person. The generational inver-

sion reporting error occurs when a

person lling out their census orm

misunderstands the direction o the

relationship being requested in the

relationship question. For example,

a householder lls out the orm and

places their own name and inorma-

tion in the response area or Person

1. Then, this person enters inorma-

tion in the Person 2 response area

or another person in the house-

hold. The relationship question

or Person 2 asks, How is this

person related to Person 1? This

is where the generational inver-

sion relationship reporting error

occurs. Sometimes, the respondent

misunderstands the direction o

the relationship that the question

is intending to collect. I the house-

holder is trying to ll out inorma-

tion or their biological child, the

relationship response or Person 2should be biological son or daugh-

ter. This is how Person 2 is related

to Person 1. However, sometimes

the householder will mistakenly

choose ather or mother as the

relationship response or Person

2. In the special circumstance

where this relationship cannot be

corrected because the inormation

on the census orm is incomplete,

Person 2 also happens to have a

missing or invalid age, and Person

1 has an older age (e.g., age 90),

then allocation procedures would

allocate an age dierence to Person

2 that would be consistent with

an age or a parent o Person 1.

This set o conditions results in the

allocation o an erroneous older,

and sometimes centenarian, age or

Person 2 with the aulty parent rela-

tionship (Spencer, 1987). New diag-

nostic tools introduced or the 2010

Census dress rehearsal review in

2008 helped to pinpoint the area o

the allocation procedures that was

producing most o these extreme

ages. This allowed the Census

Bureau to correct these proce-dures prior to processing the 2010

Census. Thus, the proportion o

centenarians with an allocated age

in 2010 dropped to 1.9 percent.

As a result, a greater proportion o

the 2010 Census centenarian count

consists o responses o the highest

quality.

CONCLUSION

In summary, there were 53,364

centenarians in the United States in2010, representing only 1.73 per

10,000 people in the total popula-

tion. This proportion has increased

slightly since 1980, when it was

1.42 per 10,000. Centenarians are

overwhelmingly more likely to be

emale. They are less diverse in

terms o race and Hispanic origin

than the population overall, with a

larger percentage White alone and

a larger percentage non-Hispanic.

They are more likely to live in urbanareas than the other age groups

in the older population. They also

live in a much greater variety

o living arrangements, includ-

ing group quarters living such as

nursing homes, than the rest o

the older population. Lastly, they

are in higher concentrations in the

Northeast and Midwest than in the

other regions.

ABOUT THE 2010 CENSUS

Why was the 2010 Censusconducted?

The U.S. Constitution mandates

that a census be taken in theUnited States every 10 years. This

is required in order to determine

the number o seats each state

is to receive in the U.S. House o

Representatives. Age data are used

to determine the voting age popula-

tion (age 18 and older) or use in

the legislative redistricting process.

Why did the 2010 Census askthe question on age and dateof birth?

The Census Bureau collects data on

age to support a variety o legisla-

tive and program requirements.

These data are also used to aid in

the allocation o unds rom ederal

programs, in particular to programs

targeting the older population. This

includes planning or hospitals,

roads, and housing assistance.

For example, the Department o

Veterans Aairs uses census data to

plan or nursing homes, hospitals,

cemeteries, domiciliary services,

and veterans beneits; the Depart-

ment o Health and Human Services

uses age data as part o the ormula

used to allocate unds or services

to seniors with low incomes under

the Older Americans Act; and the

Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission uses age data to

enorce equal employment oppor-

tunities. These data are also used

to orecast the number o people

eligible or Social Security and Medi-care beneits.

How are data on agebeneficial?

Federal, state, and local govern-

ments need inormation on age

to implement, evaluate, and aid

programs that plan and develop

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

20/24


services or older adults. These

include, but are not limited to, the

Equal Employment Opportunity

Act, the Older Americans Act, the

Nutrition Education Program, the

Rehabilitation Act, the Long Term

Care Ombudsman Services or

Older Americans Program, and the

Supportive Housing or the Elderly

Program.

Other important uses or census

data on age are in the planning and

unding o services or the older

population, such as health service

centers, retirement homes, assisted

living or skilled-nursing acilities,

transportation availability, Social

Security, and Medicare benets.

Census data can also be used by

the private sector to determine

business locations and advertising

or goods and services targeting

older adults, investment plan-

ning, employment opportunities,

and specialized consumer needs.

Researchers can use age data to

project uture population trends,

assess mortality patterns, evaluate

shits in the geographic distribution

o the older population, and plan

ways to better serve the needs o a

given community.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

For more inormation on age in

the United States, visit the

U.S. Census Bureaus Internet site

at .

Data on age rom the 2010 Census

Summary File 1 provide inormation

at the national level and below

and are available on the Internet

at and on DVD. Data on

the centenarian population can be

ound in the 2010 Census Summary

File 1 tables PCT12 and the table

series PCT12A-O.

Inormation on condentiality

protection, nonsampling error,

and denitions is available on the

Census Bureaus Internet site at

.

For more inormation about the

2010 Census, including data prod-

ucts, call the Customer Services

Center at 1-800-923-8282. You

can also visit the Census Bureaus

Question and Answer Center at

to submit your

questions online.

REFERENCES

Human Mortality Database. Univer-

sity o Caliornia, Berkeley (USA),

and Max Planck Institute or

Demographic Research

(Germany). Available at

or

(data

downloaded on January 9, 2012).

Humes, K.R. and V.A. Velko, 2007,

Centenarians in the United

States: 2000, poster presented

at the 2007 Annual Meeting o

the Population Association oAmerica, New York, NY.

Kestenbaum, B. and B. R. Ferguson,

2005, Number o Centenarians

in the United States Jan. 1, 1990,

Jan. 1, 2000, and Jan. 1, 2010.

Based on Improved Medicare

Data, paper presented at the

2005 Living to 100 and Beyond

International Symposium,

Orlando, FL.

Krach, C.A. and V.A. Velko, 1999,Centenarians in the United

States, Current Population

Reports Special Studies, P23-

199RV, Washington, DC.

Murphy, S.L., J.Q. Xu, and K.D.

Kochanek, 2012, Deaths: Pre-

liminary Data or 2010. National

Vital Statistics Reports; Vol. 60,

No. 4. Hyattsville, MD: National

Center or Health Statistics.

Siegel, J.S. and J.S. Passel, 1976,

New Estimates o the Number

o Centenarians in the United

States,Journal o the American

Statistical Association, Vol. 71,No. 355, pp. 559566.

Spencer, G., 1987, Improvements

in the Quality o Census Age

Statistics or the Elderly, Data

or an Aging Population: Proceed-

ings o the 1987 Public Health

Conerence on Records and

Statistics, July 1317, Washing-

ton, D.C. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS)

881214, National Center or

Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD,

pp. 231235.

Statistics Bureau o Japan, 2011.

Table 3-1. Population (Total and

Japanese Population, by Age

(Single Years) and Sex, Percent-

age by Age, Average Age and

Median Age Japan and Preec-

tures. Data Set: 2010 Census.

Available at (data downloaded on

July 25, 2012).

Statistics Sweden. Population onDecember 31, 2010 by sex and

age. Retrieved May 24, 2010.

(). (Data

obtained through the Human

Mortality Database,

on January

9, 2012.)

U.S. Census Bureau, 2012. Annual

Resident Population Estimates

by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic

Origin or the United States:

April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2010

(NC-EST2010-ALLDATA).

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

21/24

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

22/24

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

23/24

7/30/2019 c2010sr-03

24/24

c2010sr-03

Documents