IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cen/tnotes/26-16.html

Assessment of Methods of Education Imputation in the LEHD

Author

Listed:
  • Laura D. Quinby
  • Oliver K. Shih
  • Gal Wettstein

Abstract

This technical memorandum describes our attempt to improve upon the LEHD imputation of education. The existing imputation relies on links to the decennial Census of 2000, which leads to a degradation of the quality of imputation over time. This memo relies on the American Community Survey, which is annual, to provide more timely reference points for education. We test the relative performance of four alternative imputation methodologies: Coarsened Exact Matching, Ordinary Least Squares, Random Forest, and Boosted Trees. We split the LEHD into training and testing samples and evaluate the five approaches (our four and the original LEHD method) on the testing sample on the basis of mean squared errors. We do this for the full population and for subsamples based on year, race, ethnicity, age, gender, and quartile of income.

Suggested Citation

  • Laura D. Quinby & Oliver K. Shih & Gal Wettstein, 2026. "Assessment of Methods of Education Imputation in the LEHD," CES Technical Notes Series 26-16, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    • Handle: RePEc:cen:tnotes:26-16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www2.census.gov/ces/tn/CES-TN-2026-16.pdf
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: CES Technical Notes may contain confidential data and, thereby, disclosure is prohibited. Researchers on approved projects (to apply for access, please see https://www.census.gov/ces/rdcresearch/howtoapply.html) with the correct permissions can request full text notes from CES.Technical.Notes.List@census.gov.
    File URL: https://www.census.gov/about/adrm/ced/apply-for-access.html?CES-TN-2026-16
    File Function: Confidential main document
    Download Restriction: Researchers need to have obtained appropriate permissions.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cen:tnotes:26-16. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Danielle H. Sandler (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesgvus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.