100 likes | 214 Vues
This paper presents findings on the quality impacts of posting census questionnaires based on the 2007 Census Test. It discusses the rationale for considering post-out strategies to mitigate past failures in enumerator recruitment while improving response rates. The analysis includes response differences, address register quality, operational costs, and the effects of delivery methods on follow-up success. Key conclusions highlight the balance between increased follow-up requirements due to post-out and savings for targeted initiatives, revealing manageable operational impacts.
E N D
Assessing the quality impacts of posting Census Questionnaires Garnett Compton Q2008 Conference, 8-11 July 2008
Overview • Setting the scene – Post-out and the 2007 Census Test • Differences in response • Quality of the address register • Costs • Other quality and operational impacts • Conclusions and questions
Why consider Post-out? • To reduce serious risks experienced in 2001, in particular the failure to recruit a large number of enumerators. • To provide savings to invest in improving response. • Because of the limited success of making contact at delivery.
Address register coverage • 680 (1.3%) new addresses found during enumeration in hand delivery areas • Nearly 70% of new addresses were sub-premise addresses – suggest existed at time of AC. • About 20% found already existing/available latest update. • About 1/6 found in hand delivery areas during follow-up
Estimated Cost Savings * At the start of follow-up – 23 May
Quality and operational impacts • No difference in under/over count between two methods • No difference in number failing 2 of 4 rule • No large difference in age/sex distributions between delivery methods • 50% more calls to the contact centre in post-out areas • CTES: • No difference in views on “junk” mail • Small difference recognised as “official” mail
Conclusions • Post-out has an impact on return rates, but not success at follow-up. Post-out requires more follow-up to obtain same overall response rate. • Differences in return rates are not affected by the hard to count characteristics of an area (i.e. the ETC). • No significant differences in response quality • A post-out methodology will allow savings to invest in targeted follow-up and community liaison. • The levels of AR undercoverage will be small with minimal, but manageable, impact on the overall quality. • Some operational impacts but manageable through design and development
Thank you Any Questions?