There seem to be MSAs missing from the MET2013 Omission and Commission Errors by MSA document. Flint, MI, for example, is not included. However, it doesn’t appear to be a matter of not listing MSAs with zero omission or commission errors, either—Flagstaff, AZ, for example, has zero such errors and is listed accordingly. Is there another reason why certain MSAs are excluded, and is there somewhere else I can find the omission and commission errors for the MSAs that are not listed?
There are three MET2013 omission and commission spreadsheets provided at the bottom of the MET2013 description. They each report errors for a different PUMA vintage (2000 or 2010) and/or a different set of samples. In each case, they list only the MSAs that are identified by MET2013, i.e., those MSAs that have omission + commission error < 15%.
The spreadsheet that you linked to identifies errors for 2010 PUMAs, as used in 2012 and later ACS samples. Flint is not in the spreadsheet because Flint’s combined error is > 15% for 2010 PUMAs, and MET2013 doesn’t report Flint’s code for the 2012 and later ACS samples.
Flint has a lower mismatch error with 2000 PUMAs, so MET2013 reports a Flint code in 2011 and earlier ACS samples, and Flint appears in the other two error spreadsheets.
We realize it could be helpful to report mismatch errors even for MSAs that have errors over 15%, so we plan to update these spreadsheets to include all MSAs at some point in the future.
In the meantime, you could use the crosswalk spreadsheets (also available through the MET2013 description) to determine which 2010 PUMAs correspond to Flint or other unidentified MSAs, and to compute the combined mismatch error for those PUMAs.