A record seven-in-ten (69%) Hispanic high school graduates in the class of 2012 enrolled in college that fall, two percentage points higher than the rate (67%) among their white counterparts,¹ according to a Pew Research Center analysis of new data from the U.S. Census Bureau.²

This milestone is the result of a long-term increase in Hispanic college-going that accelerated with the onset of the recession in 2008 (Fry and Lopez, 2012). The rate among white high school graduates, by contrast, has declined slightly since 2008.

The positive trends in Hispanic educational indicators also extend to high school. The most recent available data show that in 2011 only 14% of Hispanic 16- to 24-year-olds were high school dropouts, half the level in 2000 (28%). Starting from a much lower base, the high school dropout rate among whites also declined during that period (from 7% in 2000 to 5% in 2011), but did not fall by as much.

Despite the narrowing of some of these long-standing educational attainment gaps, Hispanics continue to lag whites in a number of key higher education measures. Young Hispanic college students are less likely than their white counterparts to enroll in a four-year college (56% versus 72%), they are less likely to attend a selective college,³ less likely to be enrolled in college full time, and less likely to complete a bachelor’s degree.

It is possible that the rise in high school completion and college enrollment by Latino youths has been driven, at least in part, by their declining fortunes in the job market. Since the onset of the recession at the end of 2007, unemployment among Latinos ages 16 to 24 has gone up by seven percentage points, compared with a five percentage point rise among white youths. With jobs harder to find, more Latino youths may have chosen to stay in school longer.

Another factor, however, could be the importance that Latino families place on a college education. According to a 2009 Pew Hispanic Center survey, 88% of Latinos ages 16 and older agreed that a college degree is necessary to get ahead in life today (Pew Hispanic Center, 2009). By contrast, a separate 2009 survey of all Americans ages 16 and older found that fewer (74%) said the same (Pew Research Social & Demographic Trends, 2009).

About this Report

This report is mainly based on data published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) in its “College Enrollment and Work Activity of High School Graduates” news releases. The original data source is the October school enrollment supplement of the Current Population Survey (CPS). Collected by the Census Bureau, the CPS is best known as the source for the monthly national unemployment rate and other labor force statistics. Each October since 1956 the CPS has included a supplemental questionnaire on school and college enrollment in the current and past year. Each month the CPS surveys about 60,000 households or about 135,000 persons. Further information on the October CPS can be found in the most recent “College Enrollment and Work Activity of High School Graduates” release or Davis and Bauman (2011).

The CPS is nationally representative of the civilian noninstitutionalized population.

This report was written by Richard Fry and Paul Taylor. Research Assistant Eileen Patten expertly formatted the tables and figures. Patten and Research Associate Wendy Wang number-checked the report. Molly Rohal was the copy editor. The authors appreciate the expertise and input of Associate Director Mark Hugo Lopez.

A Note on Terminology

The terms “Latino” and “Hispanic” are used interchangeably in this report.

Unless otherwise noted, the terms “whites,” “blacks,” and “Asians” include both the Hispanic and the non-Hispanic components of their populations.

A “recent high school graduate” refers to a 16- to 24-year-old who completed high school in the calendar year (January through October) of the survey. The vast majority of graduates finished high school by obtaining a high school diploma, but those obtaining a GED or other equivalency are included.

An “immediate college entrant” or “recent college entrant” refers to a recent high school graduate who in October following graduation reports being enrolled in a college or university. Enrollment in trade schools, on-the-job training or correspondence courses is only considered as college enrollment if it advances the high school graduate toward a college, university or professional degree.

A “recent high school dropout” refers to a 16- to 24-year-old who reports not being enrolled in October of the survey year, attended school a year earlier, and did not have a high school diploma.

As recently as the class of 2000, only 49% of Hispanic high school graduates immediately enrolled in college the following fall. Since then general college-going has increased among all of the nation’s high school graduates, but it has risen the most—by 20 percentage points—among Hispanic high school graduates.⁴

In the class of 2012 Hispanic high school graduates (69%) were more likely to be enrolled in college in October 2012 than either whites (67%) or blacks (63%). In 2012 Asian recent high school completers were the most likely of the major racial and ethnic groups to be enrolled in college in October (84%).

Data on traditional college enrollment from October 2011 indicate that Hispanics and whites tend to attend different kinds of colleges and have different rates of degree completion.

In October 2011, some 72% of white 18- to 24-year-old college students were enrolled at four-year colleges or universities compared with 56% of Hispanic college students.

Also, among college students attending a four-year college or university, whites are more likely than their Hispanic counterparts to be at an academically selective institution (Bozick and Lauff, 2007).

When young Latinos go to college they are less likely than their white counterparts to be enrolled full time. In October 2011 only 78% of Hispanic 18- to 24-year-old college students were enrolled full time. By comparison, 85% of similar whites were enrolled full time.

Partly reflecting these differences in college-going and other factors, young Latinos are less likely than their white counterparts to complete a bachelor’s degree. According to Census Bureau data, in March 2012 22% of white 22- to 24-year-olds had attained at least a bachelor’s degree. Young Latinos were half as likely to have finished a four-year college degree (11%).

Finally, the finding that the immediate college entry rate for Latinos in 2012 (69%) exceeds that of whites (67%) does not imply that young Latinos are more likely to attend college than young whites. Recent high school completers are only a subset of youth. Some youth recently dropped out of high school, others dropped out in earlier years, and some were never enrolled in U.S. schools. The immediate college entry rate only refers to youth recently graduating high school. Furthermore, it is possible that a youth could delay attending college after being out of high school for some time.

It is beyond the scope of this report to explain why Hispanic college-going among recent high school graduates has steeply increased. Since 2008 the Hispanic immediate college entry rate has increased from 62% to 69%. The white immediate entry rate declined from 71% in 2008 to 67% in 2012.

One possible explanation for the divergence in college-going between Hispanics and whites since the Great Recession is the different labor market circumstances these groups have faced. Hispanic and white youth tend to live in different parts of the country, and, overall, the employment opportunities since the onset of the recession deteriorated more for Hispanic youth than for white youth.

Since 2007 the Hispanic 16- to 24-year-old unemployment rate has increased by seven percentage points, compared with a five percentage point increase among white 16- to 24-year-olds. With fewer opportunities to find jobs, it is possible that more young Latinos decided to extend their education. However, the Pew Research Center has not rigorously analyzed the relationship between the labor market and college-going; thus we simply note the correlation without drawing a causal connection.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics does not publish the number of 16- to 24-year-olds who were enrolled in school last year and did not have a high school diploma, so a precise recent high school dropout rate cannot be tabulated. Instead we can compare the number of dropouts to the size of the high school graduating classes. In October 2000 there were three newly minted Hispanic high school graduates for every one recent Hispanic high school dropout. By October 2012 there were five newly minted Hispanic high school graduates for every one dropout. Young Hispanics are increasingly staying in school.

By this measure, dropping out also has sharply declined among 16- to 24-year-old whites since 2000. The ratio of black high school graduates to black dropouts has not markedly changed from October 2000 to October 2012.

The trends on Hispanic recent school dropouts are consistent with other better known Hispanic dropout statistics. The National Center for Education Statistics reports the high school dropout rate for 16- to 24-year-olds. In October 2000 28% of Hispanic 16- to 24-year-olds were school dropouts according to this measure (National Center for Education Statistics, 2013). By October 2011 14% of Hispanics in this age group were dropouts.

Evidence also suggests that Hispanic students are increasingly likely to graduate from high school (in this instance “graduate” refers to those who obtain a regular high school diploma and does not include students obtaining a GED). A recent comprehensive investigation of high school graduation rates finds that 78% of Hispanics graduated from high school in 2010, an increase from 64% in 2000 (Murnane, 2013).

Bozick, Robert, and Erich Lauff. 2007. Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002): A First Look at the Initial Postsecondary Experiences of the High School Sophomore Class of 2002. NCES 2008-308. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Chapman, Chris, Jennifer Laird, Nicole Ifill, and Angelina KewalRamani. 2011. Trends in High School Dropout and Completion Rates in the United States: 1972-2009. NCES 2012-006. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Davis, Jessica W., and Kurt Bauman. 2011. School Enrollment in the United States: 2008. Current Population Report P20-564. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau.

Fry, Richard and Mark Hugo Lopez. 2012. “Hispanic Student Enrollments Reach New Highs in 2011.” Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Hispanic Center, August.

Murnane, Richard J. 2013. U.S. High School Graduation Rates: Patterns and Explanations. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 18701.

National Center for Education Statistics, 2013, Digest of Education Statistics 2012. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Pew Research Center. 2009. “America’s Changing Workforce: Recession Turns a Graying Office Grayer.” Washington, D.C.: Social & Demographic Trends project, September.

Pew Research Center. 2009. “Between Two Worlds: How Young Latinos Come of Age in America.” Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center, December.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. College Enrollment and Work Activity of 2012 High School Graduates. USDL-13-0670. April 17, 2013 news release.

A record 33.7 million Hispanics of Mexican origin resided in the United States in 2012, according to an analysis of Census Bureau data by Pew Research Center. This estimate includes 11.4 million immigrants born in Mexico and 22.3 million born in the U.S. who self-identified as Hispanics of Mexican origin.

Mexicans are by far the largest Hispanic-origin population in the U.S., accounting for nearly two-thirds (64%) of the U.S. Hispanic population in 2012.¹ Hispanics of Mexican origin are also a significant portion of the U.S. population, accounting for 11% overall.

The size of the Mexican-origin population in the U.S. has risen dramatically over the past four decades as a result of one of the largest mass migrations in modern history. In 1970, fewer than 1 million Mexican immigrants lived in the U.S. By 2000, that number had grown to 9.8 million, and by 2007 it reached a peak of 12.5 million (Pew Hispanic Center, 2011). Since then, the Mexican-born population has declined as the arrival of new Mexican immigrants has slowed significantly (Passel et al., 2012). Today, 35% of Hispanics of Mexican origin were born in Mexico. And while the remaining two-thirds (65%) were born in the U.S., half (52%) of them have at least one immigrant parent.

Prior to the 1980s, most of the growth in the nation’s Mexican-origin population came from Hispanics of Mexican origin born in the U.S. However, since the 1980s—a decade after the current wave of Mexican migration took off—and up until 2000, more growth in the Mexican-origin population in the U.S. could be attributed to the arrival of Mexican immigrants. In the decade from 2000 to 2010, that pattern reversed—births surpassed immigration as the main driver of the dynamic growth in the U.S. Mexican-origin population (Pew Hispanic Center, 2011).

Mexican immigration has also played a large role in shaping the nation’s immigrant population. Today, 11.4 million Mexican immigrants live in the U.S., making them the single largest country of origin group by far among the nation’s 40 million immigrants. The next largest foreign-born population, from greater China at 2 million,² is less than one-fifth the size of the Mexican-born population in the U.S.

In addition, Mexican migration has shaped the nation’s unauthorized immigrant population. More than half (55%) of the 11.1 million immigrants who are in the country illegally are from Mexico.

Among Mexican immigrants, half (51%) are in the U.S. illegally while about a third are legal

permanent residents (32%) and 16% are naturalized U.S. citizens. Overall, naturalization rates among Mexican immigrants who are in the country legally are just half that of legal immigrants from all other countries combined (Gonzalez-Barrera et al., 2013).

Internationally, the U.S. is far and away the top destination for immigrants from Mexico. Fully 96% 0f Mexicans who leave Mexico migrate to the U.S. (Connor et al., 2012) Worldwide, 9% of people born in Mexico live in the U.S.³ In addition, the U.S. has more immigrants from Mexico alone than any other country has immigrants.⁴

Mexican Immigrants Today and Two Decades Ago

The characteristics of Mexican immigrants have changed over the decades. Compared with 1990, Mexican immigrants in 2011 were less likely to be male (53% vs. 55%), considerably older (median age of 38 vs. 29), better educated (41% with high school or more vs. 25%), and have been in the U.S. for longer (71% had been in the U.S. for more than 10 years, compared with 50%).

On economic measures, Mexican immigrants have mixed results. Although median personal earnings increased by about $2,000 during the last two decades, the median household income of Mexican immigrants suffered a drop of more than $4,500. This reflects the effects of the recent economic recession that drove up unemployment rates in the nation, particularly among Mexican immigrants.

This demographic portrait compares the demographic, income and economic characteristics of the foreign-born and native-born Mexican-origin populations with the characteristics of all Hispanics in the U.S. It is based on tabulations from the 2011 American Community Survey by the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center. Key findings include:

• Immigration status. Almost two-thirds of Mexicans in the U.S. are native born (65%). About two-thirds of immigrants from Mexico (65%) arrived in the U.S. in 1990 or later.
• Language. Two-thirds (66%) of Mexican-origin Hispanics ages 5 and older speak English proficiently.⁵ The remaining 34% report speaking English less than very well, equal to the share among all Hispanics. About nine-in-ten (89%) native-born Mexicans ages 5 and older speak English proficiently. This compares to about one-in-three (29%) among Mexican immigrants.
• Age. Mexican-origin Hispanics are younger than both the U.S. population and Hispanics overall. The median age of Mexicans is 25; the median ages of the U.S. population and all Hispanics are 37 and 27, respectively. U.S.-born Mexicans are considerably younger than their foreign-born counterparts. The median age of native-born Mexicans is 17, compared with 38 of the foreign born.
• Marital status. Among those ages 15 and older, Mexican immigrants are more likely than native-born Mexicans to be married—58% vs. 34% respectively. As a group, Mexican-origin Hispanics ages 15 and older are slightly more likely (45%) to be married than Hispanics overall (43%).
• Fertility. Almost one-in-ten (8%) Mexican women ages 15 to 44 gave birth in the 12 months prior to this survey. That was the same as the rate for all Hispanic women—8%—and slightly higher than the overall rate for U.S. women—6%. More than four-in-ten (45%) Mexican women ages 15 to 44 who gave birth in the 12 months prior to the survey were unmarried. That was similar to the rate for all Hispanic women—47%—and greater than the overall rate for U.S. women—38%.
• Regional dispersion. More than half (52%) of Mexican-origin Hispanics live in the West, mostly in California (36%), and another 35% live in the South, mostly in Texas (26%). There is no significant difference in the regional dispersion of Mexicans by nativity.
• Educational attainment. Mexicans have lower levels of education than the Hispanic population overall. Some 10% of Mexicans ages 25 and older—compared with 13% of all U.S. Hispanics—have obtained at least a bachelor’s degree. Mexicans born in the U.S. are almost three times more likely to have earned a bachelor’s degree than those born in Mexico—15% vs. 6% respectively. About six-in-ten Mexican immigrants have not earned a high school diploma (59%), compared with 21% of Mexicans born in the U.S.
• Income. The median annual personal earnings for Hispanics of Mexican origin ages 16 and older was $20,000 in the year prior to the survey, the same as for U.S. Hispanics overall. U.S.-born Mexicans had higher earnings than their immigrant counterparts—a median of $22,000 vs. $19,000 respectively.
• Poverty status. The share of Mexicans who live in poverty, 27%, is slightly higher than the rate for Hispanics overall (25%). U.S.-born Mexicans are slightly less likely to live in poverty than their foreign-born counterparts—26% vs. 29% respectively.
• Health insurance. One-third of Mexicans (33%) do not have health insurance, compared with 30% of all Hispanics. More than half (57%) of Mexican immigrants are uninsured, compared with 20% of those born in the U.S.
• Homeownership. The rate of homeownership (49%) among Mexican-origin Hispanics is higher than the rate for all Hispanics (46%). The rate of homeownership among U.S.-born Mexicans (53%) is higher than that of Mexican immigrants (45%).

About this Report

This report examines the Hispanic population of Mexican origin in the United States by its nativity. Several data sources were used to compile the statistics shown in this report. The data for the demographic portrait tables are derived from the 2011 American Community Survey (1% IPUMS), which provides detailed geographic, demographic and economic characteristics for each group. Historical trends for the Mexican-origin and Mexican foreign-born population are based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey (CPS) March Annual Social and Economic Supplement conducted for 1995 to 2012 and U.S. censuses from 1850 to 2010. Estimates of the unauthorized population are based on augmented data from the March supplement of the CPS.

This report was written by Ana Gonzalez-Barrera, research associate, and Mark Hugo Lopez, associate director. Paul Taylor provided comments and editorial guidance. Jeffrey Passel provided guidance on the report’s statistical analysis. Anna Brown number-checked the report. Molly Rohal was the copy editor.

A Note on Terminology

The terms “Latino” and “Hispanic” are used interchangeably in this report.

“Native born” refers to persons who are U.S. citizens at birth, including those born in the United States, Puerto Rico or other U.S. territories and those born abroad to parents at least one of whom was a U.S. citizen.

“Foreign born” refers to persons born outside of the United States, Puerto Rico or other U.S. territories to parents neither of whom was a U.S. citizen.

The following terms are used to describe immigrants and their status in the U.S. In some cases, they differ from official government definitions because of limitations in the available survey data.

“Legal permanent resident,” “legal permanent resident alien,” “legal immigrant” and “authorized migrant” refer to a citizen of another country who has been granted a visa that allows work and permanent residence in the U.S. For the analyses in this report, legal permanent residents include persons admitted as refugees or granted asylum.

“Naturalized citizen” refers to a legal permanent resident who has fulfilled the length of stay and other requirements to become a U.S. citizen and who has taken the oath of citizenship.

“Unauthorized migrant” refers to a citizen of another country who lives in the U.S. without a currently valid visa.

“Eligible immigrant” in this report, refers to a legal permanent resident who meets the length of stay qualifications to file a petition to become a citizen but has not yet naturalized.

“Legal temporary migrant” refers to a citizen of another country who has been granted a temporary visa that may or may not allow work and temporary residence in the U.S.

Capps, Ranolph, Leighton Ku, Michael E. Fix, Chris Furgiuele, Jeffrey S. Passel, Rajeev Ramchand, Scott McNiven and Dan Perez-Lopez. 2002. “How are Immigrants Faring After Welfare Reform? Preliminary Evidence from Los Angeles and New York City—Final Report.” Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, March.

Connor, Phillip, et al. 2012. “Faith on the Move: The Religious Affiliation of International Migrants.” Washington, DC: Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, March.

Gibson, Campbell and Kay Jung. 2006. “Historical Census Statistics on the Foreign-Born Population of the United States: 1850 to 2000.” Population Division Working Paper No. 81. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau, February.

Gonzalez-Barrera, Ana, Mark Hugo Lopez, Jeffrey S. Passel and Paul Taylor. 2013. “The Path Not Taken: Two-thirds of Legal Mexican Immigrants are not U.S. Citizens.” Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center, February.

Marcelli, Enrico A. and Paul M. Ong. 2002. “2000 Census Coverage of Foreign-Born Mexicans in Los Angeles County: Implications for Demographic Analysis.” Paper presented at the 2002 annual meeting of the Population Association of America, Atlanta, GA, May.

Passel, Jeffrey. 2007. “Growing Share of Immigrants Choosing Naturalization.” Washington, D.C : Pew Hispanic Center, March.

Passel, Jeffrey S. 2007. Unauthorized Migrants in the United States: Estimates, Methods, and Characteristics. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 57. Paris: OECD Working Party on Migration, September.

Passel, Jeffrey S. and Rebecca L. Clark. 1998. Immigrants in New York: Their Legal Status, Incomes and Taxes. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, April.

Passel, Jeffrey S. and D’Vera Cohn. 2008. “Trends in Unauthorized Immigration: Undocumented Inflow Now Trails Legal Inflow.” Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center, October.

Passel, Jeffrey S. and D’Vera Cohn. 2009. “A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States.” Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center, April.

Passel, Jeffrey S. and D’Vera Cohn. 2010. “U.S. Unauthorized Immigration Flows Are Down Sharply Since Mid-Decade.” Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center, September.

Passel, Jeffrey S. and D’Vera Cohn. 2011. “Unauthorized Immigrant Population: National and State Trends, 2010.” Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center, February.

Passel, Jeffrey, D’Vera Cohn, and Ana Gonzalez-Barrera. 2012. “Net Migration from Mexico Falls to Zero—and Perhaps Less.” Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center, April.

Passel, Jeffrey S., Jennifer Van Hook, and Frank D. Bean. 2004. Estimates of Legal and Unauthorized Foreign-born Population for the United States and Selected States, Based on Census 2000. Report to the Census Bureau. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, June.

Pew Hispanic Center. 2011. “The Mexican-American Boom: Births Overtake Immigration.” Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center, July.

U.S. Census Bureau. 1975. Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, Bicentennial Edition, Part 2.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Series C228-295.

The American Community Survey (ACS) is a continuously fielded survey that collects detailed information from a sample of the U.S. population on a wide range of social and demographic topics. Each month the ACS samples about 250,000 households. Interviews are conducted by mail and in person; follow-up interviews are conducted on a sample of initially non-responding households. The nominal sample size of the ACS is about 3.1 million households per year; about 2.1 million households are included in the final sample.⁶ The monthly samples do not overlap within five-year periods so that detailed information can be obtained for various geographic levels by combining samples across months.

Data from the ACS are released on an annual basis covering interviews conducted during calendar years. Information from a single year of ACS interviews is published for the nation, states, and “recognized legal, administrative, or statistical areas” with populations of 65,000 or more. Data for three consecutive calendar years are combined to provide tabulations for areas with populations of less than 20,000; data for five consecutive years provide information for all areas down to census tracts and block groups. The ACS began in 2005 with a sample of the household population and was expanded to full operational status in 2006 when the household and group quarters populations were included.

The ACS includes questions on place of birth (state or country), citizenship and residence one year before the interview. For people born outside the U.S., the ACS asks when the person came to live in the United States. These data items provide information on the foreign-born population in the U.S. and their movement to the U.S. ACS data presented in this report come from tabulations of microdata obtained from the Integrated Public-Use Microdata Series of the University of Minnesota (IPUMS). For each year, the microdata set represents a 1% sample of the U.S. population or about 3 million individual cases per year.

Like any survey, estimates from the ACS are subject to sampling error and (potentially) measurement error. Information on the ACS sampling strategy and associated error is available at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/methodology/methodology_main/. An example of measurement error is that citizenship rates for the foreign born are estimated to be overstated in the decennial census and other official surveys, such as the ACS (see Jeffrey Passel. “Growing Share of Immigrants Choosing Naturalization,” Pew Hispanic Center, Washington, D.C. (March 28, 2007)). Finally, estimates from the ACS may differ from the decennial census or other Census Bureau surveys due to differences in methodology and data collection procedures⁷

Decennial Censuses: 1850 through 2000

U.S. decennial censuses from 1850 through 2000 have provided information on the foreign-born population via a question on place of birth. Through 1970, these censuses also asked mother’s country of birth and father’s country of birth, which permit identification of the second generation. Data on the Mexican-born population from 1850 through 1990 are from these census results presented by Gibson and Jung (2006) and in the Historical Statistics of the United States (U.S. Census Bureau, 1975). Data for 1980 through 2000 come from the 5% public-use sample of census records from Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) to generate information on the foreign-born population. These sources also collect information on citizenship and year of entry to the U.S.

Data on the Mexican-origin population from 1850 through 2000 are based on Pew Hispanic Center tabulations of census records from the IPUMS.

Current Population Survey (CPS): 1995-2012

Monthly CPS

The Current Population Survey (CPS) is a monthly survey conducted by the Census Bureau for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The CPS is a stratified probability sample of about 60,000 households designed to provide state-specific information on employment and unemployment (http://www.census.gov/cps/methodology/). Generally, about 50,000-55,000 households are interviewed. The sample has overlapping rotation groups in which each household is interviewed in four consecutive months, is out of the sample for eight months, and then returns to the sample for four more consecutive months.

The monthly CPS has a range of questions focused on labor force participation, but also collects information on demographic characteristics, education and immigration through questions on country of birth, parents’ country of birth and citizenship (since 1994). The citizenship information identifies respondents as U.S. natives, U.S. citizens through naturalization and non-citizens (but with no further information on legal status). The latter two groups comprise the foreign-born population. For persons born outside the United States, the CPS asks when the individuals “came to live in the United States.” All CPS cases are included in public-use microdata files, available from a variety of sources.

March Annual Social and Economic Supplement (ASEC)

Each March, the basic CPS sample and questionnaire are expanded for the Annual Social and Economic Supplement (ASEC). The sample is augmented to about 80,000 households with a double sample of Hispanic households and oversampling of households with children and households headed by persons who are not white. The questionnaire is expanded to include questions about health insurance, detailed sources of income, program participation and residence the previous March. This makes the March ASEC supplement the main source of information on poverty and lack of health insurance. The question on residence one year prior to the survey date provides information on current migration into the United States. In this report, the March CPS is the principal data source on the size and characteristics of the unauthorized population (see below for estimation methodology).

The published information from the CPS and the CPS microdata use survey weights based on the most current information available to the Census Bureau at the time the survey is conducted. Because additional data on population change can become available and because of changes in the methods used to measure population change, the weights for the monthly CPS and the March supplements are not necessarily consistent across time. Consequently, comparisons of population numbers across different releases of the CPS can conflate actual population change with methodological changes. To minimize the impact of methodological change on comparisons across time, the Pew Hispanic Center has developed alternative weights for the March CPS supplements of 1995-2012 that use a consistent set of population estimates and permit more accurate comparisons over time. The methodology for developing the alternative weights is described below.

Method for Weighting CPS 1995-2012 Data

CPS population figures are based on the Census Bureau’s official population estimates of the civilian, non-institutional population for the nation and states through a weighting process that ensures that the CPS figures agree with pre-specified national population totals by age, sex, race and Hispanic origin and with state-level totals by age, sex and race. The population estimates used to weight each March CPS are based on the latest available figures at the time the survey weights are estimated. Previous CPS weights are not revised to take into account updated population estimates.

This weighting process produces the best estimates available at the time of the survey, but does not guarantee that a time series produced across multiple CPSs is consistent or accurate.  Significant discontinuities can be introduced when the Census Bureau changes it population estimation methods (as it did several times early in the 2000s and in 2007 and 2008) or when the entire estimates series is recalibrated to take into account the results of a new census (as in 2012 for the 2010 census and 2001 for the 2000 census).

The estimates shown for the Mexican-born and Mexican-origin populations in this report are derived from March CPS files for 1995-2011 that have been reweighted to take into account population estimates consistent with the 1990 census, the 2000 census, the 2010 census and the 2012 population estimates. The population estimates used to reweight the March 2011 CPS come from the Census Bureau’s “Vintage 2011” population estimates (http://www.census.gov/popest/data/index.html); they are consistent with the 2010 census and the estimates used to weigh the March 2012 CPS. The population estimates used to reweight the March 2001 through March 2010 CPSs are the Census Bureau’s intercensal population estimates for the 2000s (http://www.census.gov/popest/data/intercensal/index.html); these population estimates use demographic components of population change for 2000-2010 and are consistent with both the 2000 and 2010 censuses. Similarly, the population estimates used to reweight the March 1995 through March 2000 CPSs are the intercensal population estimates for the 1990s (http://www.census.gov/popest/data/intercensal/index.html), which are consistent with the 1990 and 2000 censuses.

The reweighting methodology follows, to the extent possible, the methods used by the Census Bureau in adjusting the sample weights to the population totals. A more detailed discussion of the methods can be found in the Methodological Appendix to Passel and Cohn, 2010 (http://www.pewhispanic.org/2010/09/01/us-unauthorized-immigration-flows-are-down-sharply-since-mid-decade/) and in the Census Bureau’s documentation of CPS weighting procedures (http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/tp-66.pdf).

Residual Method for Estimating Unauthorized Immigrant Population

The data presented in this report on unauthorized and legal immigrants from Mexico were developed with essentially the same methods used in previous Pew Hispanic Center reports (Passel and Cohn 2010; Passel and Cohn, 2009). The national and state estimates use a multistage estimation process, principally using March Supplements to the Current Population Survey (CPS).

The first stage in the estimation process uses CPS data as a basis for estimating the number of legal and unauthorized immigrants included in the survey and the total number in the country using a residual estimation methodology. This method compares an estimate of the number of immigrants residing legally in the country with the total number in the CPS; the difference is assumed to be the number of unauthorized immigrants in the CPS. The legal resident immigrant population is estimated by applying demographic methods to counts of legal admissions covering the period from 1980 to the present obtained from the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Immigration Statistics and its predecessor at the Immigration and Naturalization Service. The initial estimates here are calculated separately for age-gender groups in six states (California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois and New Jersey) and the balance of the country; within these areas the estimates are further subdivided into immigrant populations from 35 countries or groups of countries by period of arrival in the United States. Variants of the residual method have been widely used and are generally accepted as the best current estimates. See also Passel and Cohn (2011, 2010, 2008) and Passel (2007) for more details.

Then, having estimated the number of legal and unauthorized immigrants in the March CPS Supplements, we assign individual foreign-born respondents in the survey a specific status (one option being unauthorized immigrant) based on the individual’s demographic, social, economic, geographic and family characteristics. The data and methods for the overall process were developed initially at the Urban Institute by Passel and Clark (1998) and were extended by work of Passel, Van Hook and Bean (2004) and by subsequent work at the Pew Hispanic Center.

The final step adjusts the estimates of legal and unauthorized immigrants counted in the survey for omissions. The basic information on coverage is drawn principally from comparisons with Mexican data, U.S. mortality data and specialized surveys conducted at the time of the 2000 census (Bean et al. 1998; Capps et al. 2002; Marcelli and Ong 2002). These adjustments increase the estimate of the legal foreign-born population, generally by 1% to 3%, and the unauthorized immigrant population by 10% to 15%. The individual survey weights are adjusted to account for immigrants missing from the survey.