• It aggregated the data for Alaska’s then 23 boroughs
and census areas into 5 entities that it treated as the
statistical equivalents of counties;
• It did not provide separate data for independent cities
and most counties that were coextensive with an
incorporated place; and,
• It did not include a few other counties and statis
tically equivalent entities.
8 The 41 entities included the 37 “census subareas” in
Alaska and the 4 “quadrants” in Washington, D.C.
9 The 40 entities include the 40 “census subareas” in
Alaska. At the request of the government of the District
of Columbia, the “quadrants” are not being used for the
1990 census; they have been replaced by a single MCD
called “Washington.”
10 In agreement with the State of Hawaii, the Census
Bureau does not recognize the city of Honolulu, which is
coextensive with Honolulu County, as an incorporated
place for purposes of statistical presentations. Instead,
the State delineates, and the Census Bureau provides
data for, CDPs that define the separate communities
within Honolulu County.
11 The 1987 economic censuses included only those
incorporated places having a population of 2,500 or
more, except for three smaller places.
12 The 1987 economic censuses included as places those
minor civil divisions in the six New England States,
New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania that
contained 10,000 or more people.
13 In the six New England States, the 1987 economic
censuses aggregated the data for those portions of
counties that were not included in some metropolitan
area as the statistical equivalents of places.
14 This number includes 102,235 entities that the
Census Bureau called enumeration districts — EDs - for
the 1980 decennial census. All portions of the United
States are covered by block groups for the 1990 census.
15 Includes only those eligible areas participating
under the provisions of Public Law 94-171.
16 Data were tabulated by census block only for limited
areas in the 1980 decennial census - urbanized areas
and their vicinity, other incorporated places with a
population of 10,000 or more, and areas that chose to
contract with the Census Bureau for such data. (The
latter category included 5 entire states: Georgia,
Mississippi, New York, Rhode Island, and Virginia.)
Carbaugh, L.W. and R.W. Marx, 1990. “The TIGER
System: A Census Bureau Innovation Serving Data
Analysts.” Government Information Quarterly, 7(3),
pp. 285-306.
Kinnear, C., 1987. “The TIGER Structure.” Proceedings
Auto-Carto 8, ACSM, Bethesda, MD-USA, pp. 249-257.
LaMacchia, R.A., 1989. “The TIGER File and Redis
tricting.” Paper presented at the Conference on Re
apportionment and the 1990 Census, Orlando, FL-USA.
LaMacchia, R.A. and S.G. Tomasi, 1990. “Planned
TIGER System Products.” Paper presented at the an
nual spring conference of The Government Publications
Librarians of New England, Amherst, MA-USA.
Marx, R.W., 1986. “The TIGER System: Automating
the Geographic Structure of the United States Census.”
Government Publications Review, 13, pp. 181-201.
Marx, R.W., 1988. “LIS/GIS Activities of the United
States Census Bureau.” Paper presented at an infor
mation exchange sponsored by the United States
Embassy, Bonn, Federal Republic of Germany.
Marx, R.W., 1990a. “Census Geography.” Applied
Community Research, Monograph Bl, American
Chamber of Commerce Researchers Association,
Alexandria, VA-USA.
Marx, R.W. (guest editor), et al., 1990b. “Special
Content: The Census Bureau’s TIGER System.”
Cartography and Geographic Information Systems,
17(1), ACSM, Bethesda, MD-USA, pp. 9-113.
Marx, R.W. and A.J. Saalfeld, 1988. “Programs for
Assuring Map Quality at the Bureau of the Census.”
Proceedings of the 4th Annual Research Conference,
U.S. Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC-USA,
pp. 239-259.
McKenzie, B.Y. and R.A. LaMacchia, 1987. “The U.S.
Geological Survey - U.S. Bureau of the Census
Cooperative Digital Mapping Project: A Unique Success
Story.” Paper presented at the fall meeting of the
American Congress on Surveying and Mapping, Reno,
NV-USA.
Torrey, B.B., R.W. Marx, and R.A. Turnage, 1989.
“Global Change, Population, and the Role of a TIGER.”
Proceedings International Geographic Information
Systems (1GIS) Symposium ’89, AAG, Washington,
DC-USA, pp. 315-318.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1985a. “Census Bureau
Programs and Products.” Factfinder for the Nation,
CCF No. 18 (Rev.). Washington, DC-USA.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1985b. TIGER Tales.
Washington, DC-USA.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1987. Counting for
Representation: The Census and the Constitution.
Washington, DC-USA.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1988. “History and
Organization.” Factfinder for the Nation, CCF No. 4
(Rev.). Washington, DC-USA.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1989a. 1990 Census of
Population and Housing Tabulation and Publication
Program. Washington, DC-USA.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1989b. Census ABCs:
Applications in Business and Community. Washington,
DC-USA.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1989c. Strength in Numbers:
Your Guide to 1990 Census Redistricting Data from the
U.S. Bureau of the Census. Washington, DC-USA.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1989d. TIGER ! Line
Precensus Files, 1990 Technical Documentation.
Washington, DC-USA.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990a. 1987 Agricultural
Atlas of the United States, Volume 2, Subject Series,
Part 1. Washington, DC-USA: U.S. Government
Printing Office. In Press.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990b. Census '90 Basics.
Washington, DC-USA.
500