1 / 20

Quality Assessment of 2008 Integrated Census - Israel

Quality Assessment of 2008 Integrated Census - Israel. Pnina ZADKA Central Bureau of Statistics Israel. Content of Presentation. The integrated census in a nutshell Improved Population Register (IPR) Quality Geographic infrastructure quality Area sample survey data collection quality

ulla
Télécharger la présentation

Quality Assessment of 2008 Integrated Census - Israel

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. Quality Assessment of 2008 Integrated Census - Israel Pnina ZADKA Central Bureau of Statistics Israel UNECE Geneva 2009

  2. Content ofPresentation • The integrated census in a nutshell • Improved Population Register (IPR) Quality • Geographic infrastructure quality • Area sample survey data collection quality • Over-count survey data collection quality • Automated procedures quality UNECE Geneva 2009

  3. The integrated census in a nutshell • Population register improved by administrative sources (IPR) • Administrative families • Two independent samples • Area sample to estimate under-count (CAPI) • IPR sample to estimate over-count (CATI) • Editing and imputation • Calculating weights • Final demographic estimates UNECE Geneva 2009

  4. Improved Register Quality • An accumulative register – nobody is deleted • “Inactive” persons records • Deaths • Very old people • “Active persons” • “Suspected inactive” • Border control files • National Insurance Institute files UNECE Geneva 2009

  5. IPR Quality assessment – “active” persons • 8 million “active” records in the population register • 518,000 “active” persons, re-defined as “inactive” in the IPR based on external administrative sources • 0.46% (33k) were miss-classified as “active” in IPR • 0.04% (2.8k) were miss-classified as “inactive” in IPR UNECE Geneva 2009

  6. IPR Quality assessment -address • 80% of the activepersons live in their IPR registered “statistical area” (census tract) • 12% of the activepersons live in their IPR locality in a different “statistical area” • 8% of the activepersons live in a different locality UNECE Geneva 2009

  7. Geographic infrastructure • Building Layer was frozen 18 months prior to under-count survey data collection process (updated up to one year lag) • Improving orientation - 3694 land marks were added to the computerized maps • Pre-census enumeration updating of new residential buildings – 9032 (5%) buildings added UNECE Geneva 2009

  8. Under-count survey quality • Coverage • 5% less dwellings than expected, according to the number of administrative households • 83% of dwellings were interviewed • 78% full questionnaires • 5% partial questionnaires • 4% refusals • 9% no contact (un-occupied, closed, business) UNECE Geneva 2009

  9. Under-count survey quality • Reliability 5% of the households were re-interviewed over the phone using a short questionnaire by a superior. Rare cases of misconduct (less than 0.5% in total) whenever possible they were re-interviewed on the full questionnaire UNECE Geneva 2009

  10. Under-count survey on line assessment testing • Consistency verification during the interview • “Warning” an alarm to the interviewer to verify the response • “Error!” notifying the interviewer of an incorrect response preventing the continuation of the interview • Incorrect control digit of Personal Identification Number (PIN) Not yet quantified UNECE Geneva 2009

  11. On line auditing • Daily auditing of the previous day data transmissions • Set of pre-defined queries, updated along the field work • All (100%) of the questionnaires were audited • Feedback was sent to the regional staff each morning (before the interviewers start their next day of work) UNECE Geneva 2009

  12. Types of queries - examples • Reduced household size • Information not obtained from interviewee • Skipping questions • Missing critical information UNECE Geneva 2009

  13. On line validation • Daily matching with IPR to validate identification parameters • PIN • Date of birth • Given name • Father’s given name UNECE Geneva 2009

  14. Over count survey -assessment • Telephone interview procedure • Recording all interviews , listening to a sample of previous days interviews • Incognito on line listening to a sample of interviews • Miss conducts rare, repeated interviews for interviewers with miss conducts UNECE Geneva 2009

  15. Over count survey -assessment • 77.2% - response rate to telephone interview • 5.1% - without telephones (no telephone registered on their name or a first kin such as parents, children, siblings) • 6.2% - wrong numbers • 11.2% - “no response” UNECE Geneva 2009

  16. Over count survey –resolutions assessment • 82.5 % - Census tract (full address) • 4.4% - Locality • 13.1% - Unknown locality (deceased, abroad less than 12 months, locality’s name does not exist, un-known locality, refused to report) UNECE Geneva 2009

  17. Over count survey secondary uses • Assessment of Under-count field work • 1% of persons were omitted in the under-count survey (entire household omitted or persons omitted from household questionnaire) UNECE Geneva 2009

  18. Timeliness • Data collection over 6 months • Automated procedures • Matching (97%) • Coding (75%) • Editing and imputation (100%) UNECE Geneva 2009

  19. Timeliness • Demographic results for localities - two months after completing of the field operation • Socio-demographic results ten months after the field operation UNECE Geneva 2009

  20. ThankYou UNECE Geneva 2009

More Related