# Household Count Mismatching **URL:** \ **Category:** USA\ **Created:** [February 25, 2022, 6:27am UTC](https://forum.ipums.org/t/household-count-mismatching/4540 "2022-02-25T06:27:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Zachary\_Marhanka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e9a140/32.png) [@Zachary\_Marhanka](https://forum.ipums.org/u/Zachary_Marhanka)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2022, 6:27am UTC](https://forum.ipums.org/t/household-count-mismatching/4540/1 "2022-02-25T06:27:43Z")
**I am running into a weird mismatch of PUMA household counts between my downloaded 2015-2019 IPUMS datasets and tidy census get\_pums() estimates. Under my original dataset, no alteration to sample size (outside of keeping the default 7,613,000 household sample) or sample cases. I downloaded the PUMS2019 household-level data to “PUMS18195” and run the following to get the estimated total population using household weights (HHWT) for multiple PUMAs.** Agg ← PUMS18195 %\>% group\_by(PUMA,STATEFIP,YEAR) %\>% summarize( total\_HH = sum(HHWT)) Agg[which(Agg$STATEFIP==1 & Agg$PUMA==100 & Agg$YEAR==2019),] **The output total\_HH is 92,126 households for PUMA 100.** **When I run the code in tidycensus with get\_pums()** get\_pums( variables = c(“PUMA”), state = “AL”, survey = “acs5”, year = 2019 ) → ALdf ALdf %\>% distinct(SERIALNO, .keep\_all = T) %\>% group\_by(ST, PUMA) %\>% summarize( total\_HH = sum(WGTP), ) **The output total\_HH is 74,488 for PUMA 100.** **Does anyone know why this may be the case? I am using the PUMA populations in a crosswalk to move from PUMA to county, so I want to make sure my estimates are accurate as I am using those estimates to further calculate the parameters of my eventual model. Any help would be appreciated!** ---
**Author:** ![Zachary\_Marhanka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e9a140/32.png) [@Zachary\_Marhanka](https://forum.ipums.org/u/Zachary_Marhanka)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2022, 3:13am UTC](https://forum.ipums.org/t/household-count-mismatching/4540/2 "2022-02-27T03:13:38Z")
get\_pums( variables = c(“SERIALNO”,“SPORDER”,“PUMA”,“WGTP”,“ELEP”,“FULP”,“GASP”), variables\_filter = list(SPORDER=1), state = “AL”, survey = “acs5”, year = 2012 ) I am now also running into the following issue. When trying to collect PUMA level electricity cost data for the end-years 2012-2015 I receive an error that “PUMA” is not an available variable. After looking into it, I am under the impression that there are inconsistencies with PUMAs in the 2012-2015 end-years. Is there a way to collect PUMA-level data for these years? ---
**Author:** ![KariWilliams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@KariWilliams](https://forum.ipums.org/u/KariWilliams)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2022, 8:11pm UTC](https://forum.ipums.org/t/household-count-mismatching/4540/3 "2022-03-01T20:11:44Z")
I am not able to replicate your estimate of 92,126 but am able to exactly replicate the tidycensus estimate when I restrict to one person her household (PERNUM == 1) and omitting group quarters (keeping GQ == 1, 2, or 5). Regarding your second post, I cannot help with questions about tidycensus, but am not aware of any comparability issues with [PUMAs](https://usa.ipums.org/usa-action/variables/puma#comparability_section) for 2012-forward–there may be some ideas on the [ACS Data Users Group forum](https://acsdatacommunity.prb.org/discussion-forum/f/forum). ---
**Author:** ![KariWilliams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@KariWilliams](https://forum.ipums.org/u/KariWilliams)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2022, 8:33pm UTC](https://forum.ipums.org/t/household-count-mismatching/4540/4 "2022-03-01T20:33:23Z")
> I should clarify–there aren’t comparability issues with the 2012-forward PUMAs, but the 2012-2015 5-year ACS files span the 2011/2012 change in PUMA definitions. Because of this, it is possible that either tidycensus or the Census API might just withhold the PUMA variable (but I don’t know that). As you navigate the definition change, you may be interested in the IPUMS USA variable [CPUMA0010](https://usa.ipums.org/usa-action/variables/CPUMA0010#description_section), which provides codes for Consistent Public Use Microdata Areas (ConsPUMAs); these are the smallest geographic units that can be consistently identified across the change. ---
**Author:** ![MPC\_vanriper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bc8723/32.png) [@MPC\_vanriper](https://forum.ipums.org/u/MPC_vanriper)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2022, 9:16pm UTC](https://forum.ipums.org/t/household-count-mismatching/4540/5 "2022-03-01T21:16:55Z")
According to the [get\_pums()](https://walker-data.com/tidycensus/reference/get_pums.html) documentation, you need to specify the PUMAs you want in the "puma = " argument. You can also select the PUMAs you want within specific states using the "state = " argument. Based on my understanding, you don’t request the PUMA as a variable in the variables argument; instead you use the state or puma argument.