A. SUMMARY This dataset provides metrics on the Completeness Check phase of the building permit application process. This is the first review step, in which permit center staff verify that all required documents have been submitted and completed, before an application proceeds to full technical review. The dataset helps track how long this phase takes for each submission, measured in both calendar days and business days. Completeness Check runs from the date of submission until the date a Completeness Letter is sent to the applicant. It also tracks compliance with the City’s permit processing performance metrics.

You can see a dashboard which shows the City's current permit processing performance on sf.gov.

B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED This dataset is generated using data from OnBase, the City’s system for building permit application intake. Each record in the dataset corresponds to a submission undergoing completeness review. One submission may cover multiple building permit applications. Data includes submission and result dates, which are used to calculate review durations. A performance target is assigned based on current service goals.

C. UPDATE PROCESS This dataset is refreshed daily using internal data pipelines that query the most recent completeness check events from OnBase. Updates reflect newly submitted applications and changes in review outcomes.

D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET Records with CALENDAR_DAYS < 0 may indicate incomplete data. Final performance targets are in calendar days, so SLA_DAYS will be the same as CAL_SLA_DAYS.

On June 18, 2024, completeness check data was enhanced with a more accurate date of correspondence. Data prior to this will use the decision date for the end date, which is typically very similar.

Public-facing statistics like median days or percentage performance against targets are calculated from this dataset.

The CALENDAR_DAYS field, i.e. the number of days a review took to be completed, only includes the numbers of days a review took to be completed if the review has been completed or finished (regardless of the outcome).

The MET_SLA field will have a value of "FALSE" (i.e. the target was not met) for both closed reviews that were not completed within their performance target and any open reviews that have exceeded their performance target as of the date the data was last updated (i.e. "data_as_of" date).

E. RELATED DATASETS Planning Department Project Application Review Metrics Building Permit Issuance Metrics Building Permit Completeness Check Review Metrics Building Permit Application Review Metrics

Electronic Health Records (EHRs) are integral for storing comprehensive patient medical records, combining structured data (e.g., medications) with detailed clinical notes (e.g., physician notes). These elements are essential for straightforward data retrieval and provide deep, contextual insights into patient care. However, they often suffer from discrepancies due to unintuitive EHR system designs and human errors, posing serious risks to patient safety. To address this, we developed EHRCon, a new dataset and task specifically designed to ensure data consistency between structured tables and unstructured notes in EHRs. EHRCon was crafted in collaboration with healthcare professionals using the MIMIC-III EHR dataset, and includes manual annotations of 4,101 entities across 105 clinical notes checked against database entries for consistency. EHRCon has two versions, one using the original MIMIC-III schema, and another using the OMOP CDM schema, in order to increase its applicability and generalizability.

Introduce the Damage tool, a utility which creates file manifests in a variety of formats. We will draw on real-world examples to illustrate how Damage could be used in the DLI program to assure the integrity of downloaded files and to identify and fix issues in DLI-distributed data.

**Title: **Practical Exploration of SQL Constraints: Building a Foundation in Data Integrity Introduction: Welcome to my Data Analysis project, where I focus on mastering SQL constraints—a pivotal aspect of database management. This project centers on hands-on experience with SQL's Data Definition Language (DDL) commands, emphasizing constraints such as PRIMARY KEY, FOREIGN KEY, UNIQUE, CHECK, and DEFAULT. In this project, I aim to demonstrate my foundational understanding of enforcing data integrity and maintaining a structured database environment. Purpose: The primary purpose of this project is to showcase my proficiency in implementing and managing SQL constraints for robust data governance. By delving into the realm of constraints, you'll gain insights into my SQL skills and how I utilize constraints to ensure data accuracy, consistency, and reliability within relational databases. What to Expect: Within this project, you will find a series of projects that focus on the implementation and utilization of SQL constraints. These projects highlight my command over the following key constraint types: NOT NULL: The NOT NULL constraint is crucial for ensuring the presence of essential data in a column. PRIMARY KEY: Ensuring unique identification of records for data integrity. FOREIGN KEY: Establishing relationships between tables to maintain referential integrity. UNIQUE: Guaranteeing the uniqueness of values within specified columns. CHECK: Implementing custom conditions to validate data entries. DEFAULT: Setting default values for columns to enhance data reliability. Each exercise within this project is accompanied by clear and concise SQL scripts, explanations of the intended outcomes, and practical insights into the application of these constraints. My goal is to showcase how SQL constraints serve as crucial tools for creating a structured and dependable database foundation. I invite you to explore these projects in detail, where I provide hands-on examples that highlight the importance and utility of SQL constraints. Together, these projects underscore my commitment to upholding data quality, ensuring data accuracy, and harnessing the power of SQL constraints for informed decision-making in data analysis. 3.1 CONSTRAINT - ENFORCING NOT NULL CONSTRAINT WHILE CREATING NEW TABLE. 3.2 CONSTRAINT- ENFORCE NOT NULL CONSTRAINT ON EXISTING COLUMN. 3.3 CONSTRAINT - ENFORCING PRIMARY KEY CONSTRAINT WHILE CREATING A NEW TABLE. 3.4 CONSTRAINT - ENFORCE PRIMARY KEY CONSTRAINT ON EXISTING COLUMN. 3.5 CONSTRAINT - ENFORCING FOREIGN KEY CONSTRAINT WHILE CREATING NEW TABLE. 3.6 CONSTRAINT - ENFORCE FOREIGN KEY CONSTRAINT ON EXISTING COLUMN. 3.7CONSTRAINT - ENFORCING UNIQUE CONSTRAINTS WHILE CREATING A NEW TABLE. 3.8 CONSTRAINT - ENFORCING UNIQUE CONSTRAINT IN EXISTING TABLE. 3.9 CONSTRAINT - ENFORCING CHECK CONSTRAINT IN NEW TABLE. 3.10 CONSTRAINT - ENFORCING CHECK CONSTRAINT IN THE EXISTING TABLE. 3.11 CONSTRAINT - ENFORCING DEFAULT CONSTRAINT IN THE NEW TABLE. 3.12 CONSTRAINT - ENFORCING DEFAULT CONSTRAINT IN THE EXISTING TABLE.

Snapshot img

Test Data Management Market Size 2025-2029

The test data management market size is forecast to increase by USD 727.3 million, at a CAGR of 10.5% between 2024 and 2029.

The market is experiencing significant growth, driven by the increasing adoption of automation by enterprises to streamline their testing processes. The automation trend is fueled by the growing consumer spending on technological solutions, as businesses seek to improve efficiency and reduce costs. However, the market faces challenges, including the lack of awareness and standardization in test data management practices. This obstacle hinders the effective implementation of test data management solutions, requiring companies to invest in education and training to ensure successful integration. To capitalize on market opportunities and navigate challenges effectively, businesses must stay informed about emerging trends and best practices in test data management. By doing so, they can optimize their testing processes, reduce risks, and enhance overall quality.

What will be the Size of the Test Data Management Market during the forecast period?

Explore in-depth regional segment analysis with market size data - historical 2019-2023 and forecasts 2025-2029 - in the full report.
Request Free SampleThe market continues to evolve, driven by the ever-increasing volume and complexity of data. Data exploration and analysis are at the forefront of this dynamic landscape, with data ethics and governance frameworks ensuring data transparency and integrity. Data masking, cleansing, and validation are crucial components of data management, enabling data warehousing, orchestration, and pipeline development. Data security and privacy remain paramount, with encryption, access control, and anonymization key strategies. Data governance, lineage, and cataloging facilitate data management software automation and reporting. Hybrid data management solutions, including artificial intelligence and machine learning, are transforming data insights and analytics. Data regulations and compliance are shaping the market, driving the need for data accountability and stewardship. Data visualization, mining, and reporting provide valuable insights, while data quality management, archiving, and backup ensure data availability and recovery. Data modeling, data integrity, and data transformation are essential for data warehousing and data lake implementations. Data management platforms are seamlessly integrated into these evolving patterns, enabling organizations to effectively manage their data assets and gain valuable insights. Data management services, cloud and on-premise, are essential for organizations to adapt to the continuous changes in the market and effectively leverage their data resources.

How is this Test Data Management Industry segmented?

The test data management industry research report provides comprehensive data (region-wise segment analysis), with forecasts and estimates in 'USD million' for the period 2025-2029, as well as historical data from 2019-2023 for the following segments. ApplicationOn-premisesCloud-basedComponentSolutionsServicesEnd-userInformation technologyTelecomBFSIHealthcare and life sciencesOthersSectorLarge enterpriseSMEsGeographyNorth AmericaUSCanadaEuropeFranceGermanyItalyUKAPACAustraliaChinaIndiaJapanRest of World (ROW).

By Application Insights

The on-premises segment is estimated to witness significant growth during the forecast period.In the realm of data management, on-premises testing represents a popular approach for businesses seeking control over their infrastructure and testing process. This approach involves establishing testing facilities within an office or data center, necessitating a dedicated team with the necessary skills. The benefits of on-premises testing extend beyond control, as it enables organizations to upgrade and configure hardware and software at their discretion, providing opportunities for exploration testing. Furthermore, data security is a significant concern for many businesses, and on-premises testing alleviates the risk of compromising sensitive information to third-party companies. Data exploration, a crucial aspect of data analysis, can be carried out more effectively with on-premises testing, ensuring data integrity and security. Data masking, cleansing, and validation are essential data preparation techniques that can be executed efficiently in an on-premises environment. Data warehousing, data pipelines, and data orchestration are integral components of data management, and on-premises testing allows for seamless integration and management of these elements. Data governance frameworks, lineage, catalogs, and metadata are essential for maintaining data transparency and compliance. Data security, encryption, and access control are paramount, and on-premises testing offers greater control over these aspects. Data reporting, visualization, and insigh

Background There are a variety of ways in which accuracy of clinical tests can be summarised in systematic reviews. Variation in reporting of summary measures has only been assessed in a small survey restricted to meta-analyses of screening studies found in a single database. Therefore, we performed this study to assess the measures of accuracy used for reporting results of primary studies as well as their meta-analysis in systematic reviews of test accuracy studies. Methods Relevant reviews on test accuracy were selected from the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (1994–2000), which electronically searches seven bibliographic databases and manually searches key resources. The structured abstracts of these reviews were screened and information on accuracy measures was extracted from the full texts of 90 relevant reviews, 60 of which used meta-analysis. Results Sensitivity or specificity was used for reporting the results of primary studies in 65/90 (72%) reviews, predictive values in 26/90 (28%), and likelihood ratios in 20/90 (22%). For meta-analysis, pooled sensitivity or specificity was used in 35/60 (58%) reviews, pooled predictive values in 11/60 (18%), pooled likelihood ratios in 13/60 (22%), and pooled diagnostic odds ratio in 5/60 (8%). Summary ROC was used in 44/60 (73%) of the meta-analyses. There were no significant differences in measures of test accuracy among reviews published earlier (1994–97) and those published later (1998–2000). Conclusions There is considerable variation in ways of reporting and summarising results of test accuracy studies in systematic reviews. There is a need for consensus about the best ways of reporting results of test accuracy studies in reviews.

This archive provides additional data for the article "Understanding Test Convention Consistency

as a Dimension of Test Quality" by Martin P. Robillard, Mathieu Nassif, and Muhammad Sohail,

published in ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology.

Comparison of detection accuracy for various objects in the test data set.

A. SUMMARY This dataset provides review time metrics for the San Francisco Planning Department’s application review process. The following metrics are provided: total days to Planning approval, days to finish completeness review, days to first check plan letter, and days to complete resubmission review. Targets for each metric and outcomes relative to these targets are also included. These metrics allow for ongoing tracking for individual planning projects and for the calculation of summary statistics for Planning review timelines. There are both Project level metrics and project event level metrics in this table. You can see a dashboard which shows the City's current permit processing performance on sf.gov. B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED Planning application review is tracked within Planning’s Project and Permit Tracking System (PPTS). Planners enter review period start and end dates in PPTS when review milestones are reached. Review timeline data is extracted from PPTS and review timelines and outcomes are calculated and consolidated within this dataset. The dataset is generated by a data model that pulls from multiple raw Accela sources and joins them together. C. UPDATE PROCESS This dataset is updated daily overnight. D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET Use this dataset to analyze project level timelines for planning projects or to calculate summary metrics related to the planning review and approval processes. The review metric type is defined in the ‘project stage’ column. Note that multiple rounds of completeness check review and resubmission review may occur for a single Planning project. The ‘potential error’ column flags records where data entry errors are likely present. Filter out rows where a value is entered in this column before building summary statistics. E. RELATED DATASETS Planning Department Project Events (coming soon) Planning Department Projects (coming soon) Building Permits Building Permit Application Issuance Metrics Building Permit Completeness Check Review Metrics Building Permit Application Review Metrics Planning Department Project Application Review Metrics

We often talk about making data FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable), but what about data accuracy, reliability, and consistency? Research data are constantly being moved through stages of collection, storage, transfer, archiving, and destruction. This movement comes at a cost, as files stored or transferred incorrectly may be unusable or incomplete. This session will cover the basics of data integrity, from collection to validation.

Blockchain data query: [PR8305] data consistency test

This dataset captures detailed insights into typing performance, providing valuable metrics such as typing speed, accuracy, and error patterns.It includes data from individual who participated in typing tests, measuring their efficiency in terms of words per minute (WPM), characters typed, time taken, and error rates.

The famous Iris dataset , attached below is the readme.md file for the general discussion over the dataset. Lets get started

A challenge to many real-world data streams is imbalance with concept drift, which is one of the most critical tasks in anomaly detection. Learning nonstationary data streams for anomaly detection has been well studied in recent years. However, most of the researches assume that the class of data streams is relatively balanced. Only a few approaches tackle the joint issue of imbalance and concept drift. To overcome this joint issue, we propose an ensemble learning method with generative adversarial network-based sampling and consistency check (EGSCC) in this paper. First, we design a comprehensive anomaly detection framework that includes an oversampling module by generative adversarial network, an ensemble classifier, and a consistency check module. Next, we introduce double encoders into GAN to better capture the distribution characteristics of imbalanced data for oversampling. Then, we apply the stacking ensemble learning to deal with concept drift. Four base classifiers of SVM, KNN, DT and RF are used in the first layer, and LR is used as meta classifier in second layer. Last but not least, we take consistency check of the incremental instance and check set to determine whether it is anormal by statistical learning, instead of threshold-based method. And the validation set is dynamic updated according to the consistency check result. Finally, three artificial data sets obtained from Massive Online Analysis platform and two real data sets are used to verify the performance of the proposed method from four aspects: detection performance, parameter sensitivity, algorithm cost and anti-noise ability. Experimental results show that the proposed method has significant advantages in anomaly detection of imbalanced data streams with concept drift.

Recently-developed methods that integrate multiple data sources arising from the same ecological processes have typically utilized structured data from well-defined sampling protocols (e.g., capture-recapture and telemetry). Despite this new methodological focus, the value of opportunistic data for improving inference about spatial ecological processes is unclear and, perhaps more importantly, no procedures are available to formally test whether parameter estimates are consistent across data sources and whether they are suitable for integration. Using data collected on the reintroduced brown bear population in the Italian Alps, a population of conservation importance, we combined data from three sources: traditional spatial capture-recapture data, telemetry data, and opportunistic data. We developed a fully integrated spatial capture-recapture (SCR) model that included a model-based test for data consistency to first compare model estimates using different combinations of data, and then, by acknowledging data-type differences, evaluate parameter consistency. We demonstrate that opportunistic data lend itself naturally to integration within the SCR framework and highlight the value of opportunistic data for improving inference about space use and population size. This is particularly relevant in studies of rare or elusive species, where the number of spatial encounters is usually small and where additional observations are of high value. In addition, our results highlight the importance of testing and accounting for inconsistencies in spatial information from structured and unstructured data so as to avoid the risk of spurious or averaged estimates of space use and consequently, of population size. Our work supports the use of a single modeling framework to combine spatially-referenced data while also accounting for parameter consistency.

A. SUMMARY This dataset provides the time from filing to issuance for issued Building Permits.

You can see a dashboard which shows the City's current permit processing performance on sf.gov.

B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED This data was created by deduplicating DBI’s Building Permit dataset by selecting records where primary_address = ‘Y’. The data was further filtered to only include permits with an issued date. The number of calendar days between the filed_date and the issued_date was also calculated.

C. UPDATE PROCESS The process that builds this dataset will run nightly and include all permits entered into the system up to the time of the refresh (see the “data as of” column in the dataset).

D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET Use this dataset to understand the typical time it takes from when the City confirms that an application is complete and all required filing fees have been paid (filed_date) to the time when plans have been approved and all required forms and issuance fees have been received (issued_date).

E. RELATED DATASETS Building Permits Building Permit Completeness Check Review Metrics Building Permit Application Review Metrics Planning Department Project Application Review Metrics

Data Quality as a Service (DQaaS) Market Outlook

According to the latest research, the global Data Quality as a Service (DQaaS) market size reached USD 2.48 billion in 2024, reflecting a robust interest in data integrity solutions across diverse industries. The market is poised to expand at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 18.7% from 2025 to 2033, with the forecasted market size anticipated to reach USD 12.19 billion by 2033. This remarkable growth is primarily driven by the increasing reliance on data-driven decision-making, regulatory compliance mandates, and the proliferation of cloud-based technologies. Organizations are recognizing the necessity of high-quality data to fuel analytics, artificial intelligence, and operational efficiency, which is accelerating the adoption of DQaaS globally.

The exponential growth of the Data Quality as a Service market is underpinned by several key factors. Primarily, the surge in data volumes generated by digital transformation initiatives and the Internet of Things (IoT) has created an urgent need for robust data quality management platforms. Enterprises are increasingly leveraging DQaaS to ensure the accuracy, completeness, and reliability of their data assets, which are crucial for maintaining a competitive edge. Additionally, the rising adoption of cloud computing has made it more feasible for organizations of all sizes to access advanced data quality tools without the need for significant upfront investment in infrastructure. This democratization of data quality solutions is expected to further fuel market expansion in the coming years.

Another significant driver is the growing emphasis on regulatory compliance and risk mitigation. Industries such as BFSI, healthcare, and government are subject to stringent regulations regarding data privacy, security, and reporting. DQaaS platforms offer automated data validation, cleansing, and monitoring capabilities, enabling organizations to adhere to these regulatory requirements efficiently. The increasing prevalence of data breaches and cyber threats has also highlighted the importance of maintaining high-quality data, as poor data quality can exacerbate vulnerabilities and compliance risks. As a result, organizations are investing in DQaaS not only to enhance operational efficiency but also to safeguard their reputation and avoid costly penalties.

Furthermore, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) technologies into DQaaS solutions is transforming the market landscape. These advanced technologies enable real-time data profiling, anomaly detection, and predictive analytics, which significantly enhance the effectiveness of data quality management. The ability to automate complex data quality processes and derive actionable insights from vast datasets is particularly appealing to large enterprises and data-centric organizations. As AI and ML continue to evolve, their application within DQaaS platforms is expected to drive innovation and unlock new growth opportunities, further solidifying the marketÂ’s upward trajectory.

Ensuring the reliability of data through Map Data Quality Assurance is becoming increasingly crucial as organizations expand their geographic data usage. This process involves a systematic approach to verify the accuracy and consistency of spatial data, which is essential for applications ranging from logistics to urban planning. By implementing rigorous quality assurance protocols, businesses can enhance the precision of their location-based services, leading to improved decision-making and operational efficiency. As the demand for geographic information systems (GIS) grows, the emphasis on maintaining high standards of map data quality will continue to rise, supporting the overall integrity of data-driven strategies.

From a regional perspective, North America currently dominates the Data Quality as a Service market, accounting for the largest share in 2024. This leadership is attributed to the early adoption of cloud technologies, a mature IT infrastructure, and a strong focus on data governance among enterprises in the region. Europe follows closely, with significant growth driven by strict data protection regulations such as GDPR. Meanwhile, the Asia Pacific region is witnessing the fastest growth, propelled by rapid digitalization, increasing investments in cloud

Abstract

The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) is a household survey programme developed by UNICEF to assist countries in filling data gaps for monitoring human development in general and the situation of children and women in particular. MICS is capable of producing statistically sound, internationally comparable estimates of social indicators. The current round of MICS is focused on providing a monitoring tool for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the World Fit for Children (WFFC), as well as for other major international commitments, such as the United Nations General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on HIV/AIDS and the Abuja targets for malaria.

The 2006 Iraq Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey has as its primary objectives: - To provide up-to-date information for assessing the situation of children and women in Iraq; - To furnish data needed for monitoring progress toward goals established by the Millennium Development Goals and the goals of A World Fit For Children (WFFC) as a basis for future action; - To contribute to the improvement of data and monitoring systems in Iraq and to strengthen technical expertise in the design, implementation and analysis of such systems.

Survey Content MICS questionnaires are designed in a modular fashion that was customized to the needs of the country. They consist of a household questionnaire, a questionnaire for women aged 15-49 and a questionnaire for children under the age of five (to be administered to the mother or caretaker). Other than a set of core modules, countries can select which modules they want to include in each questionnaire.

Survey Implementation The survey was implemented by the Central Organization for Statistics and Information Technology (COSIT), the Kurdistan Region Statistics Office (KRSO) and Suleimaniya Statistical Directorate (SSD), in partnership with the Ministry of Health (MOH). The survey also received support and assistance of UNICEF and other partners. Technical assistance and training for the surveys was provided through a series of regional workshops, covering questionnaire content, sampling and survey implementation; data processing; data quality and data analysis; report writing and dissemination.

Geographic coverage

The survey is nationally representative and covers the whole of Iraq.

Analysis unit

Households (defined as a group of persons who usually live and eat together)

De jure household members (defined as memers of the household who usually live in the household, which may include people who did not sleep in the household the previous night, but does not include visitors who slept in the household the previous night but do not usually live in the household)

Women aged 15-49

Children aged 0-4

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women aged 15-49 years resident in the household, and all children aged 0-4 years (under age 5) resident in the household. The survey also includes a full birth history listing all chuldren ever born to ever-married women age 15-49 years.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample for the Iraq Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey was designed to provide estimates on a large number of indicators on the situation of children and women at the national level; for areas of residence of Iraq represented by rural and urban (metropolitan and other urban) areas; for the18 governorates of Iraq; and also for metropolitan, other urban, and rural areas for each governorate. Thus, in total, the sample consists of 56 different sampling domains, that includes 3 sampling domains in each of the 17 governorates outside the capital city Baghdad (namely, a metropolitan area domain representing the governorate city centre, an other urban area domain representing the urban area outside the governorate city centre, and a rural area domain) and 5 sampling domains in Baghdad (namely, 3 metropolitan areas representing Sadir City, Resafa side, and Kurkh side, an other urban area sampling domain representing the urban area outside the three Baghdad governorate city centres, and a sampling domain comprising the rural area of Baghdad).

The sample was selected in two stages. Within each of the 56 sampling domains, 54 PSUs were selected with linear systematic probability proportional to size (PPS).

\After mapping and listing of households were carried out within the selected PSU or segment of the PSU, linear systematic samples of six households were drawn. Cluster sizes of 6 households were selected to accommodate the current security conditions in the country to allow the surveys team to complete a full cluster in a minimal time. The total sample size for the survey is 18144 households. The sample is not self-weighting. For reporting national level results, sample weights are used.

The sampling procedures are more fully described in the sampling appendix of the final report and can also be found in the list of technical documents within this archive.

(Extracted from the final report: Central Organisation for Statistics & Information Technology and Kurdistan Statistics Office. 2007. Iraq Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2006, Final Report. Iraq.)

Sampling deviation

No major deviations from the original sample design were made. One cluster of the 3024 clusters selected was not completed all othe clusters were accessed.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The questionnaires were based on the third round of the Multiple Indicator Cluster survey model questionnaires. From the MICS-3 model English version, the questionnaires were revised and customized to suit local conditions and translated into Arabic and Kurdish languages. The Arabic language version of the questionnaire was pre-tested during January 2006 while the Kurdish language version was pre-tested during March 2006. Based on the results of the pre-test, modifications were made to the wording and translation of the questionnaires.

In addition to the administration of questionnaires, fieldwork teams tested the salt used for cooking in the households for iodine content, and measured the weights and heights of children age under-5 years.

Cleaning operations

Data were processed in clusters, with each cluster being processed as a complete unit through each stage of data processing. Each cluster goes through the following steps: 1) Questionnaire reception 2) Office editing and coding 3) Data entry 4) Structure and completeness checking 5) Verification entry 6) Comparison of verification data 7) Back up of raw data 8) Secondary editing 9) Edited data back up

After all clusters are processed, all data is concatenated together and then the following steps are completed for all data files: 10) Export to SPSS in 5 files (hh - household, hl - household members, wm - women age 15-49, ch - children under 5 bh - women age 15-49) 11) Recoding of variables needed for analysis 12) Adding of sample weights 13) Calculation of wealth quintiles and merging into data 14) Structural checking of SPSS files 15) Data quality tabulations 16) Production of analysis tabulations

Detailed documentation of the editing of data can be found in the data processing guidelines in the MICS Manual (http://www.childinfo.org/mics/mics3/manual.php)

Data entry was conducted by 12 data entry operators in tow shifts, supervised by 2 data entry supervisors, using a total of 7 computers (6 data entry computers plus one supervisors computer). All data entry was conducted at the GenCenStat head office using manual data entry. For data entry, CSPro version 2.6.007 was used with a highly structured data entry program, using system controlled approach, that controlled entry of each variable. All range checks and skips were controlled by the program and operators could not override these. A limited set of consistency checks were also included inthe data entry program. In addition, the calculation of anthropometric Z-scores was also included in the data entry programs for use during analysis. Open-ended responses ("Other" answers) were not entered or coded, except in rare circumstances where the response matched an existing code in the questionnaire.

Structure and completeness checking ensured that all questionnaires for the cluster had been entered, were structurally sound, and that women's and children's questionnaires existed for each eligible woman and child.

100% verification of all variables was performed using independent verification, i.e. double entry of data, with separate comparison of data followed by modification of one or both datasets to correct keying errors by original operators who first keyed the files.

After completion of all processing in CSPro, all individual cluster files were backed up before concatenating data together using the CSPro file concatenate utility.

Data editing took place at a number of stages throughout the processing (see Other processing), including: a) Office editing and coding b) During data entry c) Structure checking and completeness d) Secondary editing e) Structural checking of SPSS data files

Detailed documentation of the editing of data can be found in the data processing guidelines in the MICS Manual (http://www.childinfo.org/mics/mics3/manual.php)

Response rate

Of the 18144 households selected for the sample, 18123 were found to be occupied. Of these, 17873 were successfully interviewed for a household response rate of 98.6 percent. In the interviewed households, 27564 women (age 15-49 years) were identified. Of these, 27186 were successfully interviewed, yielding a

--- DATASET OVERVIEW --- This dataset captures detailed information about each vacation rental property listing, providing insights that help users understand property distribution, characteristics, management styles, and guest preferences across different regions. With extensive global coverage and regular weekly updates, this dataset offers in-depth snapshots of vacation rental supply traits at scale.

The data is sourced directly from major OTA platforms using advanced data collection methodologies that ensure high accuracy and reliability. Each property listing is tracked over time, enabling users to observe changes in supply, amenity offerings, and host practices.

--- KEY DATA ELEMENTS --- Our dataset includes the following core performance metrics for each property: - Property Identifiers: Unique identifiers for each property with OTA-specific IDs - Geographic Information: Location data including neighborhood, city, region, and country - Listing Characteristics: Property type, bedroom count, bathroom count, in-service dates. - Amenity Inventory: Comprehensive list of available amenities, including essential facilities, luxury features, and safety equipment. - Host Information: Host details, host types, superhost status, and portfolio size - Guest Reviews: Review counts, average ratings, detailed category ratings (cleanliness, communication, etc.), and review timestamps - Property Rules: House rules, minimum stay requirements, cancellation policies, and check-in/check-out procedures

--- USE CASES --- Market Research and Competitive Analysis: VR professionals and market analysts can use this dataset to conduct detailed analyses of vacation rental supply across different markets. The data enables identification of property distribution patterns, amenity trends, pricing strategies, and host behaviors. This information provides critical insights for understanding market dynamics, competitive positioning, and emerging trends in the short-term rental sector.

Property Management Optimization: Property managers can leverage this dataset to benchmark their properties against competitors in the same geographic area. By analyzing listing characteristics, amenity offerings and guest reviews of similar properties, managers can identify optimization opportunities for their own portfolio. The dataset helps identify competitive advantages, potential service gaps, and management optimization strategies to improve property performance.

Investment Decision Support: Real estate investors focused on the vacation rental sector can utilize this dataset to identify investment opportunities in specific markets. The property-level data provides insights into high-performing property types, optimal locations, and amenity configurations that drive guest satisfaction and revenue. This information enables data-driven investment decisions based on actual market performance rather than anecdotal evidence.

Academic and Policy Research: Researchers studying the impact of short-term rentals on housing markets, urban development, and tourism trends can use this dataset to conduct quantitative analyses. The comprehensive data supports research on property distribution patterns and the relationship between short-term rentals and housing affordability in different markets.

Travel Industry Analysis: Travel industry analysts can leverage this dataset to understand accommodation trends, property traits, and supply and demand across different destinations. This information provides context for broader tourism analysis and helps identify connections between vacation rental supply and destination popularity.

--- ADDITIONAL DATASET INFORMATION --- Delivery Details: • Delivery Frequency: weekly | monthly | quarterly | annually • Delivery Method: scheduled file loads • File Formats: csv | parquet • Large File Format: partitioned parquet • Delivery Channels: Google Cloud | Amazon S3 | Azure Blob • Data Refreshes: weekly

Dataset Options: • Coverage: Global (most countries) • Historic Data: N/A • Future Looking Data: N/A • Point-in-Time: N/A • Aggregation and Filtering Options: • Area/Market • Time Scales (weekly, monthly) • Listing Source • Property Characteristics (property types, bedroom counts, amenities, etc.) • Management Practices (professionally managed, by owner)

Contact us to learn about all options.

--- DATA QUALITY AND PROCESSING --- Our data collection and processing methodology ensures high-quality data with comprehensive coverage of the vacation rental market. Regular quality assurance processes verify data accuracy, completeness, and consistency.

The dataset undergoes continuous enhancement through advanced data enrichment techniques, including property categorization, geographic normalization, and time series alignment. This processing ensures that users receive clean, structured data ready for immediate analysis without extensive preprocess...

A. SUMMARY This dataset provides the time the City took to complete each review step for building permit applications. It includes all plan reviews carried out by each departmental plan review station for a building permit application. It also includes whether the plan review met the City's performance target review time.

The Building Permit Application review process is where the City checks that a proposed construction project meets all the safety and code compliance requirements under the City’s Building Code and other laws. Building Permit Application data includes review times by any relevant department for a specific project, including Department of Building Inspection, Planning, Public Works, Fire, Public Utilities Commission, Public Health, and others.

You can see a dashboard which shows the City's current permit processing performance on sf.gov.

B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED The dataset is created using information from the Department of Building Inspection's Permit Tracking System (PTS). Specifically it is based on information on Building Permit Routing.

C. UPDATE PROCESS The process that builds this dataset will run nightly and include all permits and plan reviews entered into the system up to the time of the refresh (see the “data as of” column in the dataset).

D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET Use this dataset to understand the typical time it takes the City to review and issue comments on Building Permit Applications.

First plan review: This is when we do a thorough review of the project plans submitted for compliance with relevant laws and codes. This time period starts when the application is deemed complete and ends with a Plan Check Letter (for Planning entitlements) or an “Issued Comments” entry in the Department of Building Inspection’s Permit Tracking System tracking system. If the plans don’t comply with local laws, we may need to request changes.

Resubmission plan review: Once we receive your revised plans, staff complete another check for code compliance and issue another set of comments, if needed, or approve the application.

Only department stations that conduct “plan review” were included in this analysis. This includes: BLDG, MECH, MECH-E, PAD-STR, PID-PC, CP-ZOC, DPW-BSM, DPW-BUF, PW-DAC, SFFD, SFFD-PRT, SFFD-HQ, SFPUC, SFPUC-PRG, HEALTH, HEALTH-FD, HEALTH-MH, HEALTH-HM, HEALTH-RF, HEALTH-MB, HEALTH-PL, HEALTH-HP, HEALTH-AQ, HEALTH-CN, HEALTH-SW, and REDEV.

You can find additional technical information on how to calculate time to review metrics on sf.gov

E. RELATED DATASETS Building Permits Building Permit Application Issuance Metrics Building Permit Completeness Check Review Metrics Building Permit Application Review Metrics Planning Department Project Application Review Metrics