Person-level Weight Sample Clauses

The Person-level Weight clause defines how individual data points or responses are assigned specific weights in a dataset or analysis. In practice, this means that each person's input may be given more or less influence based on predetermined criteria, such as demographic representation or sampling requirements. This clause ensures that the results of analyses or surveys accurately reflect the intended population, correcting for any imbalances or biases in the sample.
Person-level Weight. The person-level weight variable (WGTSP13) was constructed as a composite of separate panel specific weights. A positive person-level weight was assigned to all key members of the U.S. civilian, non-institutionalized population for whom MEPS data were collected, representing the corresponding U.S. population in early 2011. For the Panel 16 Round 1 participants, this weight reflects the original household probability of selection for the NHIS, a factor representing the proportion of the 16 NHIS panel-quarter combinations eligible for MEPS, the oversampling of the subgroups described earlier, ratio-adjustment to NHIS national population estimates at the household level, adjustment for non-participation in MEPS at the household or dwelling unit level, and poststratification to U.S. civilian noninstitutionalized population estimates obtained from March 2011 CPS data at the family and person levels. For both Panels 15 and 16 separately person-level poststratification reflected population distributions across census region, MSA status, race/ethnicity (Hispanic, black/non-Hispanic, Asian, other), sex, and age. Finally, a composite weight was assigned to each responding person and a final poststratification was undertaken across the variables of census region, MSA status, race/ethnicity, sex, and age. Table 3-2 shows the number of persons with person weights for each of the two panels separately, as well as the combined total and the total population estimate represented by the weighted total for all persons with person-level weights. In terms of numbers of persons, there are 15,043 for Panel 15, Round 3 and 20,956 for Panel 16, Round 1. Thus, in total, there are 35,999 sample persons in the file with positive person-level weights (WGTSP13>0). The corresponding estimate for the civilian, noninstitutionalized population based on summing the weights found in the variable WGTSP13 for these 35,999 persons is 305,191,076. Table 3-2. Persons with a person weight for the 2011 Point-in-Time file Panel 15 Panel 16 Combined Population estimate (weighted total of combined sample) Number 15,043 20,956 35,999 305,191,076 Beginning with the 2001 Full Year data, MEPS transitioned to 2000 census-based population estimates for poststratification and raking. In addition, MEPS population estimates underwent some “discontinuities” due to adjustments made to the CPS estimates as of 2003 (CPS being the source of the control figures used for raking and poststratification in MEPS). Those...
View SourceView Similar (10)
Person-level Weight. The person-level weight variable (WGTSP13) was constructed as a composite of separate panel specific weights. A positive person-level weight was assigned to all key members of the U.S. civilian, non-institutionalized population for whom MEPS data were collected, representing the corresponding U.S. population in early 2003. For the Panel 8 Round 1 participants, this weight reflects the original household probability of selection for the NHIS, ratio-adjustment to NHIS national population estimates at the household level, adjustment for non-participation in MEPS at the household level, and poststratification to figures obtained from March 2003 Current Population Survey (CPS) data at the family and person levels. The person-level poststratification reflected population distributions across census region, MSA status, race/ethnicity (Hispanic, black/non-Hispanic, Asian, other), sex, and age. Table 3.2 shows the number of persons with person weights for each of the two panels separately, as well as the combined total and the total population estimate represented by the weighted total for all persons with person-level weights. In terms of numbers of persons, there are 16,413 for Panel 7, Round 3 and 18,028 for Panel 8, Round 1. Thus, in total, there are 34,441 sample persons in the file with positive person-level weights (WGTSP13>0). The corresponding estimate for the civilian, noninstitutionalized population based on summing the weights found in the variable WGTSP13 for these 34,441 persons is 285,077,107. Table 3.2. Persons with a person weight for the 2003 Point-in-Time file Panel 7 Panel 8 Combined Population estimate (weighted total of combined sample) Number 16,413 18,028 34,441 285,077,107 Some may find it helpful to note that MEPS population estimates have undergone some “discontinuities” recently, due to similar “jumps” in CPS estimates, the source of the control figures used for raking and poststratification in MEPS. Those who wish to learn about these recent changes in CPS population estimates may consult the report "Revisions to the Current Population Survey Effective in January 2003" from the January 2003 issue of the monthly Labor Review. This report was authored by ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, and ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, all at the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Differences in the way racial categories are defined are also noted in this report.
View SourceView Similar (2)
Person-level Weight. The person-level weight variable (WGTSP13) was constructed as a composite of separate panel specific weights. A positive person-level weight was assigned to all key members of the U.S. civilian, non-institutionalized population for whom MEPS data were collected, representing the corresponding U.S. population in early 2004. For the Panel 9 Round 1 participants, this weight reflects the original household probability of selection for the NHIS, ratio-adjustment to NHIS national population estimates at the household level, adjustment for non-participation in MEPS at the household level, and poststratification to figures obtained from March 2004 Current Population Survey (CPS) data at the family and person levels. The person-level poststratification reflected population distributions across census region, MSA status, race/ethnicity (Hispanic, black/non-Hispanic, Asian, other), sex, and age. Table 3.2 shows the number of persons with person weights for each of the two panels separately, as well as the combined total and the total population estimate represented by the weighted total for all persons with person-level weights. In terms of numbers of persons, there are 16,530 for Panel 8, Round 3 and 18,267 for Panel 9, Round 1. Thus, in total, there are 34,797 sample persons in the file with positive person-level weights (WGTSP13>0). The corresponding estimate for the civilian, noninstitutionalized population based on summing the weights found in the variable WGTSP13 for these 34,797 persons is 287,368,408.
View Source
Person-level Weight. The person level weight variable (WGTSP13) was constructed as a composite of separate panel specific weights. A positive person level weight was assigned to all key members of the U.S. civilian non-institutionalized population for whom MEPS data were collected, representing the corresponding U.S. population in early 2001. For the Panel 6, Round 1 participants this weight reflects the original household probability of selection for the NHIS, ratio-adjustment to NHIS national population estimates at the household level, adjustment for non-participation in MEPS at the household level, and poststratification to figures obtained from March 2001 Current Population Survey (CPS) data at the family and person levels. The person level poststratification reflected population distributions across census region, MSA status, race/ethnicity (Hispanic, black/non-Hispanic, other), sex, and age. Overall, the weighted population estimate based on WGTSP13 for the civilian noninstitutionalized population is 275,740,015. Estimates can be made for this population based on the 34,173 sample persons in the file with positive weights (WGTSP13>0).
View Source

Related to Person-level Weight

  • Entity-Level Taxation If legislation is enacted or the official interpretation of existing legislation is modified by a governmental authority, which after giving effect to such enactment or modification, results in a Group Member becoming subject to federal, state or local or non-U.S. income or withholding taxes in excess of the amount of such taxes due from the Group Member prior to such enactment or modification (including, for the avoidance of doubt, any increase in the rate of such taxation applicable to the Group Member), then the General Partner may, at its option, reduce the Minimum Quarterly Distribution and the Target Distributions by the amount of income or withholding taxes that are payable by reason of any such new legislation or interpretation (the “Incremental Income Taxes”), or any portion thereof selected by the General Partner, in the manner provided in this Section 6.9. If the General Partner elects to reduce the Minimum Quarterly Distribution and the Target Distributions for any Quarter with respect to all or a portion of any Incremental Income Taxes, the General Partner shall estimate for such Quarter the Partnership Group’s aggregate liability (the “Estimated Incremental Quarterly Tax Amount”) for all (or the relevant portion of) such Incremental Income Taxes; provided that any difference between such estimate and the actual liability for Incremental Income Taxes (or the relevant portion thereof) for such Quarter may, to the extent determined by the General Partner, be taken into account in determining the Estimated Incremental Quarterly Tax Amount with respect to each Quarter in which any such difference can be determined. For each such Quarter, the Minimum Quarterly Distribution, First Target Distribution, Second Target Distribution and Third Target Distribution, shall be the product obtained by multiplying (a) the amounts therefor that are set out herein prior to the application of this Section 6.9 times (b) the quotient obtained by dividing (i) Available Cash with respect to such Quarter by (ii) the sum of Available Cash with respect to such Quarter and the Estimated Incremental Quarterly Tax Amount for such Quarter, as determined by the General Partner. For purposes of the foregoing, Available Cash with respect to a Quarter will be deemed reduced by the Estimated Incremental Quarterly Tax Amount for that Quarter.

  • Measurement method An isolation resistance test instrument is connected between the live parts and the electrical chassis. The isolation resistance is subsequently measured by applying a DC voltage at least half of the working voltage of the high voltage bus. If the system has several voltage ranges (e.g. because of boost converter) in conductively connected circuit and some of the components cannot withstand the working voltage of the entire circuit, the isolation resistance between those components and the electrical chassis can be measured separately by applying at least half of their own working voltage with those components disconnected.

  • Mileage Measurement Where required, the mileage measurement for LIS rate elements is determined in the same manner as the mileage measurement for V&H methodology as outlined in NECA Tariff No. 4.

  • Formal Level (1) Level I - within fifteen (15) days after the occurrence of the alleged violation, misinterpretation, or misapplication of a provision of this Agreement, the grievant must present the grievance in writing on the approved form or lose the right to grieve. The form shall contain a clear, concise statement of the grievance, including the provision or provisions of this Agreement alleged to have been violated, misinterpreted, or misapplied; the circumstances involved, the decision rendered at the informal level, and the specific remedy sought. The immediate supervisor shall hold a hearing with the grievant, and shall communicate the decision in writing to the grievant within seven (7) days after receiving the grievance. In the event the immediate supervisor fails to conduct a hearing and render a decision in writing within seven days, the grievant shall notify the Superintendent, who shall convene a hearing with the immediate supervisor and the grievant within seven (7) days after notification, and direct the immediate supervisor to render a decision in writing. Such a directed decision shall be made within three (3) days. (2) Level II - In the event the grievant is not satisfied with the decision at Level I, the grievant may appeal the decision on the approved form to the Superintendent or his/her designee within seven (7) days of the receipt of the Level I decision. The form shall include a copy of the original grievance, the decision at Level I, and a clear and concise statement of the reason for the appeal. The Superintendent or his designee shall hold a hearing with the parties and render a written decision within ten (10) days of the receipt of the appeal. (3) Level III - In the event the grievant is not satisfied with the decision at Level II, the Association may advise the District within seven (7) days of receipt of the Level II decision of its intent to request a mediator from the California State Conciliation Mediation Service.

  • Measuring EPP parameters Every 5 minutes, EPP probes will select one “IP address” of the EPP servers of the TLD being monitored and make an “EPP test”; every time they should alternate between the 3 different types of commands and between the commands inside each category. If an “EPP test” result is undefined/unanswered, the EPP service will be considered as unavailable from that probe until it is time to make a new test.