1 / 16

S.A.M.P.L.E . S mall A rea M ethods for P overty and L iving condition E stimates

S.A.M.P.L.E . S mall A rea M ethods for P overty and L iving condition E stimates. Brussels, 24 february 2011. Research for evidence policy-making: the role of a Public Administration in Sample project. Michela Casarosa, Province of Pisa. The province of Pisa. TUSCANY REGION.

daria
Télécharger la présentation

S.A.M.P.L.E . S mall A rea M ethods for P overty and L iving condition E stimates

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. S.A.M.P.L.E.Small Area Methods forPoverty and Living condition Estimates Brussels, 24 february 2011 Research for evidence policy-making: the role of a Public Administration in Sample project Michela Casarosa, Province of Pisa

  2. The province of Pisa TUSCANYREGION PROVINCE OF PISA (LAU1) 5 HEALTH’S SOCIETIES 39 MUNICIPALITIES (LAU2) 2 Provincial Offices involved in Sample Project • The Provincial Social Observatory • The European Policies and International Affairs Office

  3. The Provincial Social Observatory • Annual Social Statistical BASE (data on demography, families, housing, justice, social assistance, third sector) • Local SURVEY (gender violence, young people, immigrants, security) MONITORING SOCIAL PHENOMENA PARTICIPATORY APPROACH • INVOLVEMENT of local Public Administration and third sector organisations REGIONAL NETWORK • NETWORK of 10 Provincial Observatories (health’s profile indicators)

  4. Why Sample Project… • The lackness of poverty data at small area • The need to compare our experience at european level • The increasing relevance of poverty in our public social expenditure

  5. The value added of a Public Administration in a research project • A better finalization of the research to the NEEDS of POLICYMAKERS • The knowledge of the TERRITORY • The contact with local public and third sector ORGANIZATIONS • The possibility to have access to administrative DATABASES

  6. Our main findings • Caritas database • Job center’s database • Revenue Agency database Acquisition of administrative and third sector DATABASES • Indicators of Tuscany Region • Stakeholders Indicators Selection of poverty INDICATORS more relevant for policy planning • Agreement with Caritas • Network of 252 stakeholders The construction of the Provincial Social OBSERVATORY

  7. Regional Indicators INDICATORS FOR HEALTH’S PROFILE 1. Demographic profile 2. Health’s determinants 3. Health state 4. Essential levels of sanitary assistance 6. Social and sanitary assistance • First list of 300 indicators • Meeting with referents of Health’s Societies • Last list of 250 indicators • 2 objectivs: • policies planning (health’s profile ex ante) • policies evaluation (health’s profile ex post)

  8. Some examples from regional indicators 1) DEMOGRAPHY – Indicators about:age structure, population composition 2) HEALTH’S DETERMINANTS –Indicators about:revenue, employment, lifestyle, ambient 3) HEALTH STATE – Indicators about:mortality (per age, typology, etc.), iIlness 4) ESSENTIAL LEVEL OF SANITARY ASSISTANCE – Indicatorsabout:hospitalization, medical screening 5) SOCIAL AND SANITARY ASSISTANCE – Indicators about:social expenditure distribution, assistance to persons in social distress

  9. Indicators proposals by stakeholders • An important aim of Sample project: to achieve thePOINT OF VIEW of local stakeholders on the relevance of indicators • The instrument: a SURVEY • The list of stakeholders: selection of 690 organizations • The RESPONDENTS: 252 stakeholders

  10. The questions Do they judge indicators relevant for their activity? Localstakeholders Do they judge indicators relevant for policies planning? Do they know Laeken indicators? • Public Administrations (37,2%) • Associations (42,2%) • Parishes and Caritas Counselling Centers (10,3%) • Social Cooperatives (9,3%) Do they know EU-SILC indicators?

  11. Quickly…other aims of the survey 1) Achieving stakeholders’ PERCEPTION of poverty level in their territory 2) Knowing stakeholders’ INFORMATION SYSTEM 3) Knowing their interest and their OPINION about: • The construction of a POVERTY OBSERVATORY • The Creation of a WEB PORTAL • The usefulness of activities for the EMPOWERMENTofstakeholders NETWORK (meeting, training, etc)

  12. Results: relevance of indicators

  13. Results: proposal of new indicators

  14. Results: opinion about proposals

  15. Toward a knowledge-based planning Data and indicators Our involvement in the building of the software Sample Software Free distribution to other Public Administration A simple visualization of data and indicators useful for planning

  16. Thanks for your attention! Contact: Michela Casarosa m.casarosa@provincia.pisa.it http://www.provincia.pisa.it

More Related