Top Nav Bar


Part of the Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF1) data for New Jersey was released to the public on May 23, 2001, as the Profile of General Demographic Characteristics. Highlights from those data were published in the July 2001 issue of the New Jersey Economic Indicators (pages 9-24). The following highlights were prepared based on additional SF1 data that are not included in the Profile of General Demographic Characteristics.

Unmarried Partner Households

In addition to couples identifying themselves as married, a householder may identify the person he or she is cohabitating with as an unmarried partner. These numbers may underrepresent the true number of cohabitating couples because some respondents may have been reluctant to classify themselves as cohabitating in a personal interview situation and may have described themselves as roommates, housemates, or friends not related to each other.


In both the 1990 and 2000 censuses, the "spouse" and "unmarried partner" response categories were defined and asked the same way. However, there were important differences in data processing that limit the comparability of same-sex unmarried partners between these two censuses.

In both censuses, if a person was identified as the "spouse" of the householder and was the same sex as the householder, the "spouse" response was flagged for further review and allocation, that is, assignment of a value other than that originally reported, based on other data on the form. In 1990, the edit and allocation procedures did not allow same-sex "spouse" combinations to occur, thus resulting in the allocation of one of these two items in order to achieve editing consistency among the responses.

Processing steps were changed for Census 2000 for households which contained same-sex "spouses". If the person with the "spouse" category was the same sex as the householder, and if neither person had their sex previously allocated, a relationship response of "spouse" was allocated as an "unmarried partner" response.

Taking these qualifications into consideration, the characteristics of these partners are examined here:


  • The state’s unmarried partner households (+58.6%) increased substantially faster than all households (+9.7%) between 1990 and 2000 in New Jersey.


  • In 2000, there were 151,300 households that were classified as unmarried-partner households, representing 4.9% of all households in New Jersey. In 1990, about 3.4% of New Jersey households were classified as unmarried partner households.


  • About 89% or 134,700 of those unmarried partner households were male-female (opposite sex) while 16,600 or 11% were same sex partner households. In comparison, about 3.7% of unmarried partner households in 1990 were identified as same sex partners. The 11% same sex partner households in 2000 were split equally between male-male (5.5%) and female-female (5.5%) unmarried partner households.


  • Essex County (16,200) had more unmarried partner households than any other county in the state in 2000. Hudson (14,100), Middlesex (12,000), Camden (11,300) and Bergen (11,200) filled out the top five ranking. In terms of percentage of total households, Atlantic (6.8%), Camden (6.1%) and Hudson (6.1%) counties had the highest percentage of unmarried partner households.


  • Not surprisingly, the largest municipalities (Newark, Jersey City, Paterson, Elizabeth) also had the largest numbers of unmarried partner households.


  • In terms of percentages, Fieldsboro borough (Burlington County), Commercial township (Cumberland County), Seaside Heights borough (Ocean County), Pleasantville city (Atlantic County) and Camden city (Camden County) all had more than 10% unmarried partner households versus 4.9% for the state.


Family Characteristics


  • The state’s families headed by a single parent (+16.6%) increased more than four times as fast as married-couple families (+3.8%) in the past decade. Male-headed families, no spouse present, increased by 24% while female-headed families increased by 14.3%. Female-headed families made up 75% of all single-parent families.


  • Married couple families comprised 76% of all family households in New Jersey according to the 2000 Census figures, a drop from 78.1% in 1990. The largest share of families in New Jersey were married couple families without own children under 18 (40%).


  • While the number of married-couple families with own children increased moderately (9.7%) during the 1990s, the single-parent families with own children had a substantial growth. The male- and female-householders with own children increased 50.4 percent and 23.1 percent, respectively, in New Jersey from 1990 to 2000.


Elderly Population


  • Population 85 years old and over was the fastest growing age group in New Jersey during the 1990s (+42.3%). Number of persons 100 years old and over also increased substantially from 1,127 in 1990 to 1,514 in 2000 (+23.4%), representing the continuation of the ever-increasing longevity of the state’s residents. Approximately 40 percent of the state’s centenarians resided in four counties: Bergen (190 persons), Essex (180 persons), Ocean (120 persons) and Union (115 persons).


Group Quarters Population by Type of Facility

All people not living in housing units are classified by the Census Bureau as living in group quarters. There are two general categories of people in group quarters: (1) institutionalized population and (2) noninstitutionlized population.


Institutionalized population includes people under formally authorized, supervised care or custody in institutions at the time of enumeration. Major categories of institution are: correctional institutions (prisons, jails, halfway houses, etc.), nursing homes, and juvenile institutions.


Noninstitutionalized population includes people who live in group quarters other than institutions. They include people enumerated in college dormitories, military quarters, group homes, religious group quarters, etc.


  • The part of New Jersey’s population that were living in group quarters facilities increased by 13.7 percent, from 171,368 in 1990 to 194,821 in 2000. The increase in the state’s household population was 8.7 percent during the same time period.


  • The number of institutionalized persons grew at a faster pace (+18.9%) than non-institutionalized persons (+7.6%) from 1990 to 2000 in New Jersey. Burlington County added more institutionalized population (+4,792 or 67.8%) than any other county in the state, while Cumberland County led the rate of increase (+72.7% or 4,395 persons) during the past decade. The largest increase in the noninstitutionalized population (+3,727) occurred in Mercer County while Burlington County had the largest loss in noninstitutionalized population (- 4,776) in the 1990s.


  • Essex County’s Newark City led the state in the number of institutionalized population in 2000, as a result of having the highest number of nursing home residents (2,420) and second-highest number of correctional facility inmates (4,298) in the state.


  • Correctional facility inmates increased dramatically during the 1990s in Burlington County’s New Hanover Township (from 548 in 1990 to 4,836 in 2000) and Cumberland County’s Bridgeton City (from 420 in 1990 to 4,048 in 2000) due to the opening of a federal penitentiary and a state prison, respectively. The closing of a county prison caused the incarcerated population to drop to zero (from 456 in 1990) in Hudson County’s Jersey City.


  • Mercer County’s Princeton Borough had the largest noninstitutionalized population in 2000 (6,644) due primarily to its college dormitory residents. College dormitory residents increased substantially between 1990 and 2000 in Essex County’s Newark City (from 1,139 to 3,351) and Mercer County’s Princeton Borough (from 4,700 to 6,628) and Ewing Township (from 2,413 to 3,486). Middlesex County’s New Brunswick City and Piscataway Township had the highest number of college dormitory residents in 1990, but experienced a decline of their dormitory population during the 1990s. (New Brunswick – from 6,774 to 5,747, Piscataway – from 6,525 to 3,511)


  • Despite the partial closure of a military base, Burlington County’s New Hanover Township still had the state’s largest military quarters population in 2000 (1,223, down from 6,356 in 1990). Monmouth County’s Colts Neck Township became the municipality with the second highest military quarters population due to a substantial increase of military personnel during the 1990s (from 219 in 1990 to 1,210 in 2000). Monmouth County’s Middletown Township and Eatontown Borough experienced a substantial decline in military quarters population between 1990 and 2000. (Middletown – from 1,057 to 23, Eatontown – from 613 to 0)


  • Cumberland County’s Vineland City led the state’s group homes’ population growth during the 1990s (from 60 to 1,119), and became the state’s number one municipality in terms of group homes’ population in 2000.


Hispanic (or Latino) by Specific Origin


        Puerto Rican remained the largest Hispanic group in New Jersey with a population of 366,788 in 2000, followed by Mexicans (102,929). Although declining from 85,378 in 1990 to 77,337 in 2000, New Jersey’s Cuban population ranked fourth among the state’s Hispanics. (See the aforementioned New Jersey Economic Indicators article.) Other than these three major groups, Dominicans, Colombians, Ecuadorians and Peruvians also had substantial representations in the state’s Hispanic population according to Census 2000.


        With a headcount of 102,630, persons originating from the Dominican Republic were the third largest Hispanic group in New Jersey as of April 1, 2000. More than two-thirds (67.4%) of the state’s Dominicans resided in three counties – Hudson (27,709), Passaic (26,954) and Middlesex (14,484). Passaic County’s Paterson City had the highest number of Dominicans (15,331) among the state’s 566 municipalities, followed by Hudson County’s Jersey City (9,186) and Middlesex County’s Perth Amboy City (8,897).


        Colombians were the fifth largest Hispanic group in New Jersey as of 2000. Their number increased from 52,210 in 1990 to 65,075 in 2000. Hudson County had the largest number of Colombians (12,843), followed by Union County (11,423) and Bergen County (11,161). Union County’s Elizabeth City had more Colombians (7,793) than any other municipality in the state. With a count of 5,110, Passaic County’s Paterson City ranked second in number of Colombians.


        Approximately 57 percent of the state’s 45,392 Ecuadorians resided in Hudson County (15,396) and Essex County (10,487), as of 2000. Essex County’s Newark City led the state’s Ecuadorian population (7,611), followed by Hudson County’s Union City (3,984) and Jersey City (3,920).


        Peruvian was another Hispanic group with at least 30,000 population in New Jersey as of 2000. One of every two of the state’s 37,672 Peruvians resided in Passaic County (11,543) and Hudson County (7,440). Passaic County’s Paterson City had the largest number of Peruvians (7,038). Elizabeth City’s (Union County) 2,830 Peruvians ranked second the in the state.


Asian by Specific Origin


        Other than the six major Asian groups – Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Korean, Vietnamese and Japanese (see the aforementioned article in the July 20001 issue of the New Jersey Economic Indicators), Pakistani was the only Asian group with more than 10,000 population in New Jersey as of 2000. About 55 percent of the state’s Pakistani population resided in Middlesex County (3,131), Hudson County (2,378) and Bergen County (1,191). Hudson County’s Jersey City (1,877) was the only New Jersey municipality with a Pakistani population exceeding 1,000 although Middlesex County’s Edison Township (671) and Woodbridge Township (619) also had noticeable numbers of Pakistanis.



Prepared by: New Jersey Department of Labor, Division of Labor Market and Demographic Research, August 2001.

at new jersey
department: lwd home | benefits | disabled | reemployment | employer | legal | safety | statistics/analysis | press
statewide: NJ Home | Services A to Z | Departments/Agencies | FAQs
Copyright © State of New Jersey 2006
Last Updated: October 11, 2006
benefits disabled reemployment business legal safety statistics and analysis press center NJDOL Home Page program areas NJHome Services A to Z Departments/Agencies FAQs contact us privacy notice legal statement NJ Home Page