ABOUT THE SURVEY
Overview
The Regional Workforce Survey (RWS hereafter) is an establishment survey that
collected information about skills, training, qualifications, staffing
patterns, recruitment, salary and benefits for occupations in the 29 county
workforce commuting region of Lubbock, TX. We identified establishments within
this region with at least 5 employees using standard commercial resources. A
stratified sample was constructed to ensure a representative sample across
three geographic regions and industrial sectors defined by 2-digit NAICS codes.
Establishments were randomly selected from a representative sample of
establishments within this sample frame. Interviewers in the
Earl Survey Research Laboratory at
Texas Tech University’s Department of Political Science conducted
survey interviews that lasted about 12 minutes on average. The response rate
for the survey was 51.5%, which means that 3,130 establishments participated in
the survey. After the data were cleaned and entry errors removed, the survey
contained responses from 3008 establishments about 520 occupations within the
region. There are responses from at least five different establishments for 270
occupations.
This survey uses a stratified sampling process to ensure a representative
sample of establishments across the workforce commuting region. Industrial
classification by two-digit NAICS codes is the first stratum. The
NAICS industry classification provides a more accurate description of
modern economies, and all government agencies are completing the transition to
these codes for economic and labor data.
The second stratum is based upon geography. The geographic stratification
creates three regional zones that are used to ensure a proportional sample (see
Table 1 and Figure 1). Zone 1 is Lubbock County. Zone 2 includes all counties
within the South Plains Workforce Development Area (SPWDA) except Lubbock
County. Zone 3 includes the 14 counties peripheral to the SPWDA. The data can
then be presented in a layered fashion so end-users can focus upon Lubbock
County, the SPWDA (including Lubbock County), or the entire workforce commuting
region (Zone 1 + Zone 2 + Zone 3).
|
Table 1.
|
Definitions of Zones used in Geographic Stratification.
|
|
Zone A
|
|
Zone B
|
|
Zone C
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lubbock
|
|
Bailey
|
Hockley
|
|
Borden
|
Kent
|
|
|
|
Cochran
|
King
|
|
Briscoe
|
Parmer
|
|
|
|
Crosby
|
Lamb
|
|
Castro
|
Scurry
|
|
|
|
Dickens
|
Lynn
|
|
Dawson
|
Stonewall
|
|
|
|
Floyd
|
Motley
|
|
Deaf-Smith
|
Swisher
|
|
|
|
Garza
|
Terry
|
|
Gaines
|
Lea, NM
|
|
|
|
Hale
|
Yoakum
|
|
Howard
|
Roosevelt
,
NM
|
|
Notes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zone A is
Lubbock
County
only.
|
|
|
|
|
Zone B is the South Plains Workforce Development Area except
Lubbock
County
|
|
Zone C includes selected counties within the 90-mile workforce commuting region of
Lubbock
,
TX
.
|
This stratified sampling produced a representative sample of establishments
within each zone and within the entire workforce commuting region. Table 2
provides a comparison of the actual distribution of establishments based on
data from an industry standard marketing resource and the sample distribution
of establishments by two-digit NAICS and regional zones. Each row indicates an
industry by a two-digit NAICS code. Each cell within the row indicates the
distribution of establishments across geographic zones. The table reports both
the distribution of establishments identified with standard marketing resources
and the distribution of survey respondents. A comparison suggests the sample is
representative of the region’s establishments by industry and geographic
location. The RWS does not stratify on business size. Stratification by
industry type and geography captures a representative sample of business sizes
as demonstrated in Table 3.
|
Table
2. Distribution of Actual Establishments and Survey Responses by Industry and
Geographic Zone.
|
|
Description
|
NAICS code
|
Zone 1
|
Zone 2
|
Zone 3
|
|
|
|
Actual
|
Survey
|
Actual
|
Survey
|
Actual
|
Survey
|
|
Agriculture,
Forestry, Fishing and Hunting
|
11
|
8.4%
|
9.7%
|
34.4%
|
41.7%
|
57.2%
|
48.6%
|
|
Mining
|
21
|
1.0%
|
0.0%
|
16.5%
|
14.8%
|
82.5%
|
85.2%
|
|
Utilities
|
22
|
16.9%
|
8.3%
|
25.4%
|
33.3%
|
57.6%
|
58.3%
|
|
Construction
|
23
|
41.2%
|
40.1%
|
15.5%
|
17.2%
|
43.3%
|
42.7%
|
|
Manufacturing
1
|
31
|
39.8%
|
53.3%
|
18.5%
|
8.9%
|
41.7%
|
37.8%
|
|
Manufacturing
2
|
32
|
47.7%
|
60.0%
|
17.7%
|
2.9%
|
34.6%
|
37.1%
|
|
Manufacturing
3
|
33
|
52.0%
|
61.7%
|
15.0%
|
18.1%
|
33.1%
|
20.2%
|
|
Wholesale
Trade
|
42
|
53.6%
|
52.6%
|
15.7%
|
15.6%
|
30.7%
|
31.8%
|
|
Retail
Trade 4
|
44
|
50.6%
|
54.4%
|
16.7%
|
18.3%
|
32.7%
|
27.2%
|
|
Retail
Trade 5
|
45
|
56.2%
|
57.7%
|
15.8%
|
16.2%
|
28.0%
|
26.2%
|
|
Transportation
and Warehousing 6
|
48
|
37.8%
|
50.0%
|
16.8%
|
13.2%
|
45.5%
|
36.8%
|
|
Transportation
and Warehousing 7
|
49
|
28.1%
|
32.5%
|
32.6%
|
37.5%
|
39.3%
|
30.0%
|
|
Information
|
51
|
51.6%
|
56.3%
|
15.9%
|
14.1%
|
32.5%
|
29.7%
|
|
Finance
and Insurance
|
52
|
54.5%
|
50.4%
|
18.7%
|
22.7%
|
26.8%
|
27.0%
|
|
Real
Estate and Rental and Leasing
|
53
|
67.2%
|
75.8%
|
10.2%
|
7.1%
|
22.6%
|
17.2%
|
|
Professional,
Scientific, and Technical Services
|
54
|
64.0%
|
69.3%
|
11.4%
|
7.9%
|
24.6%
|
22.8%
|
|
Management
of Companies and Enterprises
|
55
|
60.0%
|
50.0%
|
40.0%
|
50.0%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
|
Administrative
& Support & Waste Management & Remediation Services
|
56
|
70.8%
|
69.1%
|
8.3%
|
10.9%
|
20.8%
|
20.0%
|
|
Educational
Services
|
61
|
31.3%
|
31.0%
|
27.8%
|
28.2%
|
40.9%
|
40.8%
|
|
Health
Care and Social Assistance
|
62
|
57.3%
|
55.8%
|
16.0%
|
19.2%
|
26.8%
|
25.1%
|
|
Arts,
Entertainment, and Recreation
|
71
|
|