A computerized data set of demographic, economic and social data for 227 countries of the world. Information presented includes population, health, nutrition, mortality, fertility, family planning and contraceptive use, literacy, housing, and economic activity data. Tabular data are broken down by such variables as age, sex, and urban/rural residence. Data are organized as a series of statistical tables identified by country and table number. Each record consists of the data values associated with a single row of a given table. There are 105 tables with data for 208 countries. The second file is a note file, containing text of notes associated with various tables. These notes provide information such as definitions of categories (i.e. urban/rural) and how various values were calculated. The IDB was created in the U.S. Census Bureau''s International Programs Center (IPC) to help IPC staff meet the needs of organizations that sponsor IPC research. The IDB provides quick access to specialized information, with emphasis on demographic measures, for individual countries or groups of countries. The IDB combines data from country sources (typically censuses and surveys) with IPC estimates and projections to provide information dating back as far as 1950 and as far ahead as 2050. Because the IDB is maintained as a research tool for IPC sponsor requirements, the amount of information available may vary by country. As funding and research activity permit, the IPC updates and expands the data base content. Types of data include: * Population by age and sex * Vital rates, infant mortality, and life tables * Fertility and child survivorship * Migration * Marital status * Family planning Data characteristics: * Temporal: Selected years, 1950present, projected demographic data to 2050. * Spatial: 227 countries and areas. * Resolution: National population, selected data by urban/rural * residence, selected data by age and sex. Sources of data include: * U.S. Census Bureau * International projects (e.g., the Demographic and Health Survey) * United Nations agencies Links: * ICPSR: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/08490

Wildlife managers translocate greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; sage-grouse) to augment small populations, but translocated sage-grouse often fail to reproduce post-release, sometimes hampering conservation objectives. We performed two distinct sage-grouse translocation projects in California and North Dakota from 2017-2020 and employed two translocation methods at both sites: an established method of translocating females prior to the nesting season (i.e., a pre-nesting translocation), and a novel method wherein females were translocated with chicks after successfully hatching a nest in the source population (i.e., a brood translocation). Using an integrated population model (IPM), we estimated recruitment by females translocated with each method. We also estimated the finite rate of change in abundance in recipient and source populations that underwent brood and pre-nesting translocations to evaluate each method using a cost-benefit metric.

Abstract

The Demographic Sample Survey 1986/87, shortly called as DSS 1986/87 is carried out by the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) with financial support from UNFPA and technical assistance from UNDTCD.

The major objectives of the DSS are to provide intercensal estimates of some important demographic parameters such as birth, death, migration, etc. The DSS 1986/87 not only provides these parameters but also examines the factors affecting fertility, mortality and migration in more details.

Geographic coverage

National Urban/ Rural areas Ecological Zones: Mountain, Hill, Terai

Analysis unit

Individual, Household

Universe

All private households

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The DSS 1986/87 is a longitudinal study based on multi-stage national probability sample of 129 identifiable compact clusters known as ward/subwards. Ward/subwards (81 rural and 48 urban) were drawn from 35 districts (14 from Terai Zone and 18 and 3 from the Hill and Mountain zones respectively), out of a total of 75 districts in the country. The emphasis that the ultimate sampling units of DSS 1986/87 should be easily identifiable compact clusters is to ensure that the survey could be smoothly carried out in several successive rounds. The DSS 1986/87 drew samples from rural and urban areas separately in order to provide estimates of demographic and non-demographic parameters independently for each of the area.

Altogether 8640 households were eventually selected in the DSS 1986/87 for baseline and prospective study. The rural sample consisits of 6126 households while the urban sample accounts for 2514 households. The households selected in the Mountain, Hill and Terai are 675, 4179 and 3786 respectively. The urban households in the Hill and Terai are 1200 and 1314 respectively. In the Mountain there is no urban area. The sample consists of 35101 rural and 14412 urban population.

Refer to page 2 of "DSS Report" for a detailed description of the Sample Design.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The data at baseline survey were collected by using six different schedules:

1. Household schedule The household schedule was employed to collect information on some conventional socio-demographic measures of each usual/permanent member of the selected households.

2. In-migration schedule The In-migration schedule was used to collect detailed information on internal migrants and for immigrants.

3. Fertility and Mortality schedule The Fertility and Mortality schedule was used to collect the information on fertility anf mortality history of ever married worman in the household.

4. Out-migration schedule The Out-migration schedule was used to obtain detailed information on each out-migrant from the household which took place in the last five years preceding the survey.

5. Socio-economic status of the household schedule The Socio-economic status of the household schedule was used to obtain socio-economic characteristics of the households.

6. Migration survey-individual questionnaire The Migration survey-individual questionnaire was administered to internal migrants.

Refer to page 5 of "DSS Report" for detailed information on the types and contents of the questionnaires.

The Current Population Survey Civic Engagement and Volunteering (CEV) Supplement is the most robust longitudinal survey about volunteerism and other forms of civic engagement in the United States. Produced by AmeriCorps in partnership with the U.S. Census Bureau, the CEV takes the pulse of our nation’s civic health every two years. The CEV can support evidence-based decision making and efforts to understand how people make a difference in communities across the country. The findings on this page are based on data collected in September of 2017, 2019, 2021, and 2023. All figures are weighted to account for the random selection of eligible respondents and missing data due to nonresponse. They reflect state-level rates of 17 measures of civic engagement. Please see column descriptions for details. A spreadsheet with all of these figures is provided as an attachment along with additional resources about the CEV data. Click on "Show More" to view and download. To explore CEV findings in an interactive dashboard, please see https://data.americorps.gov/stories/s/AmeriCorps-Civic-Engagement-and-Volunteering-CEV-D/62w6-z7xa For the full CEV datasets, please see https://data.americorps.gov/browse?q=cev&sortBy=last_modified&utf8=%E2%9C%93

Abstract

The 1993 Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a nationally representative survey of ever-married women less than 50 years old. The survey was designed to provide information on fertility levels and trends, infant and child mortality, family planning, and maternal and child health. The TDHS was conducted by the Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies under a subcontract through an agreement between the General Directorate of Mother and Child Health and Family Planning, Ministry of Health and Macro International Inc. of Calverton, Maryland. Fieldwork was conducted from August to October 1993. Interviews were carried out in 8,619 households and with 6,519 women.

The Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a national sample survey of ever-married women of reproductive ages, designed to collect data on fertility, marriage patterns, family planning, early age mortality, socioeconomic characteristics, breastfeeding, immunisation of children, treatment of children during episodes of illness, and nutritional status of women and children. The TDHS, as part of the international DHS project, is also the latest survey in a series of national-level population and health surveys in Turkey, which have been conducted by the Institute of Population Studies, Haeettepe University (HIPS).

More specifically, the objectives of the TDHS are to:

Collect data at the national level that will allow the calculation of demographic rates, particularly fertility and childhood mortality rates; Analyse the direct and indirect factors that determine levels and trends in fertility and childhood mortality; Measure the level of contraceptive knowledge and practice by method, region, and urban- rural residence; Collect data on mother and child health, including immunisations, prevalence and treatment of diarrhoea, acute respiratory infections among children under five, antenatal care, assistance at delivery, and breastfeeding; Measure the nutritional status of children under five and of their mothers using anthropometric measurements.

The TDHS information is intended to assist policy makers and administrators in evaluating existing programs and in designing new strategies for improving family planning and health services in Turkey.

MAIN RESULTS

Fertility in Turkey is continuing to decline. If Turkish women maintain current fertility rates during their reproductive years, they can expect to have all average of 2.7 children by the end of their reproductive years. The highest fertility rate is observed for the age group 20-24. There are marked regional differences in fertility rates, ranging from 4.4 children per woman in the East to 2.0 children per woman in the West. Fertility also varies widely by urban-rural residence and by education level. A woman living in rural areas will have almost one child more than a woman living in an urban area. Women who have no education have almost one child more than women who have a primary-level education and 2.5 children more than women with secondary-level education.

The first requirement of success ill family planning is the knowledge of family planning methods. Knowledge of any method is almost universal among Turkish women and almost all those who know a method also know the source of the method. Eighty percent of currently married women have used a method sometime in their life. One third of currently married women report ever using the IUD. Overall, 63 percent of currently married women are currently using a method. The majority of these women are modern method users (35 percent), but a very substantial proportion use traditional methods (28 percent). the IUD is the most commonly used modern method (I 9 percent), allowed by the condom (7 percent) and the pill (5 percent). Regional differences are substantial. The level of current use is 42 percent in tile East, 72 percent in tile West and more than 60 percent in tile other three regions. "File common complaints about tile methods are side effects and health concerns; these are especially prevalent for the pill and IUD.

One of the major child health indicators is immunisation coverage. Among children age 12-23 months, the coverage rates for BCG and the first two doses of DPT and polio were about 90 percent, with most of the children receiving those vaccines before age one. The results indicate that 65 percent of the children had received all vaccinations at some time before the survey. On a regional basis, coverage is significantly lower in the Eastern region (41 percent), followed by the Northern and Central regions (61 percent and 65 percent, respectively). Acute respiratory infections (ARI) and diarrhea are the two most prevalent diseases of children under age five in Turkey. In the two weeks preceding the survey, the prevalence of ARI was 12 percent and the prevalence of diarrhea was 25 percent for children under age five. Among children with diarrhea 56 percent were given more fluids than usual.

Breastfeeding in Turkey is widespread. Almost all Turkish children (95 percent) are breastfed for some period of time. The median duration of breastfeeding is 12 months, but supplementary foods and liquids are introduced at an early age. One-third of children are being given supplementary food as early as one month of age and by the age of 2-3 months, half of the children are already being given supplementary foods or liquids.

By age five, almost one-filth of children arc stunted (short for their age), compared to an international reference population. Stunting is more prevalent in rural areas, in the East, among children of mothers with little or no education, among children who are of higher birth order, and among those born less than 24 months after a prior birth. Overall, wasting is not a problem. Two percent of children are wasted (thin for their height), and I I percent of children under five are underweight for their age. The survey results show that obesity is d problem among mothers. According to Body Mass Index (BMI) calculations, 51 percent of mothers are overweight, of which 19 percent are obese.

Geographic coverage

The Turkish Demographic and Health Survey (TDHS) is a national sample survey.

Analysis unit

• Household
• Women age 12-49
• Children under five

Universe

The population covered by the 1993 DHS is defined as the universe of all ever-married women age 12-49 who were present in the household on the night before the interview were eligible for the survey.

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The sample for the TDHS was designed to provide estimates of population and health indicators, including fertility and mortality rates for the nation as a whole, fOr urban and rural areas, and for the five major regions of the country. A weighted, multistage, stratified cluster sampling approach was used in the selection of the TDHS sample.

Sample selection was undertaken in three stages. The sampling units at the first stage were settlements that differed in population size. The frame for the selection of the primary sampling units (PSUs) was prepared using the results of the 1990 Population Census. The urban frame included provinces and district centres and settlements with populations of more than 10,000; the rural frame included subdistricts and villages with populations of less than 10,000. Adjustments were made to consider the growth in some areas right up to survey time. In addition to the rural-urban and regional stratifications, settlements were classified in seven groups according to population size.

The second stage of selection involved the list of quarters (administrative divisions of varying size) for each urban settlement, provided by the State Institute of Statistics (SIS). Every selected quarter was subdivided according tothe number of divisions(approximately 100 households)assigned to it. In rural areas, a selected village was taken as a single quarter, and wherever necessary, it was divided into subdivisions of approximately 100 households. In cases where the number of households in a selected village was less than 100 households, the nearest village was selected to complete the 100 households during the listing activity, which is described below.

After the selection of the secondary sampling units (SSUs), a household listing was obtained for each by the TDHS listing teams. The listing activity was carried out in May and June. From the household lists, a systematic random sample of households was chosen for the TDHS. All ever-married women age 12-49 who were present in the household on the night before the interview were eligible for the survey.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Two questionnaires were used in the main fieldwork for the TDHS: the Household Questionnaire and the Individual Questionnaire for ever-married women of reproductive age. The questionnaires were based on the model survey instruments developed in the DHS program and on the questionnaires that had been employed in previous Turkish population and health surveys. The questionnaires were adapted to obtain data needed for program planning in Turkey during consultations with population and health agencies. Both questionnaires were developed in English and translated into Turkish.

a) The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members of and visitors to the selected households and to collect information relating to the socioeconomic position of the households. In the first part of the Household Questionnaire, basic information was collected on the age, sex, educational attainment, marital status and relationship to the head of household for each person listed as a household member

Survey on Equipment and Use of Information and Communication Technologies in Households: Persons, by demographic characteristics, and individuals who believe that there are measures that encourage them in the use of the Internet. National.

Connectivity is a central concept in ecology, wildlife management and conservation science. Understanding the role of connectivity in determining species persistence is increasingly important in the face of escalating anthropogenic impacts on climate and habitat. These connectivity augmenting processes can severely impact species distributions and community and ecosystem functioning. One general definition of connectivity is an emergent process arising from a set of spatial interdependencies between individuals or populations, and increasingly realistic representations of connectivity are being sought. Generally, connectivity consists of a structural component, relating to the distribution of suitable and unsuitable habitat, and a functional component, relating to movement behavior, yet the interaction of both components often better describes ecological processes. Additionally, although implied by 'movement', demographic measures such as the occurrence or abundance of organisms are regularly overlooked when quantifying connectivity. Integrating demographic contributions based on the knowledge of species distribution patterns is critical to understanding the dynamics of spatially structured populations. Demographically-informed connectivity draws from fundamental concepts in metapopulation ecology while maintaining important conceptual developments from landscape ecology, and the methodological development of spatially-explicit hierarchical statistical models that have the potential to overcome modeling and data challenges. Together, this offers a promising framework for developing ecologically realistic connectivity metrics. This review synthesizes existing approaches for quantifying connectivity and advocates for demographically-informed connectivity as a general framework for addressing current problems across ecological fields reliant on connectivity-driven processes such as population ecology, conservation biology, and landscape ecology. Using supporting simulations to highlight the consequences of commonly made assumptions that overlook important demographic contributions, we show that even small amounts of demographic information can greatly improve model performance. Ultimately, we argue demographic measures are central to extending the concept of connectivity and resolves long-standing challenges associated with accurately quantifying the influence of connectivity on fundamental ecological processes.

This dataset was developed by the Research & Analytics Group at the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.Naming conventions:Prefixes: None Countp Percentr Ratem Mediana Mean (average)t Aggregate (total)ch Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)pch Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)chp Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)s Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% CI, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed Suffixes: _e19 Estimate from 2014-19 ACS_m19 Margin of Error from 2014-19 ACS_00_v19 Decennial 2000, re-estimated to 2019 geography_00_19 Change, 2000-19_e10_v19 2006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2019 geography_m10_v19 Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2019 geography_e10_19 Change, 2010-19The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent. The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2015-2019). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available. For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Atlanta Regional CommissionDate: 2015-2019Data License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC by 4.0)Link to the manifest: https://www.arcgis.com/sharing/rest/content/items/3d489c725bb24f52a987b302147c46ee/data

This layer was developed by the Research & Analytics Division of the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent.

The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2014-2018). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available.

For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.

For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.

Naming conventions:

Prefixes:

None

Count

p

Percent

r

Rate

m

Median

a

Mean (average)

t

Aggregate (total)

ch

Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)

pch

Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)

chp

Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)

s

Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% Confidence Interval, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed

Suffixes:

_e18

Estimate from 2014-18 ACS

_m18

Margin of Error from 2014-18 ACS

_00_v18

Decennial 2000 in 2018 geography boundary

_00_18

Change, 2000-18

_e10_v18

Estimate from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_m10_v18

Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_e10_18

Change, 2010-18

Abstract

The 1998 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS) is the latest in a series of national-level population and health surveys conducted in Ghana and it is part of the worldwide MEASURE DHS+ Project, designed to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health.

The primary objective of the 1998 GDHS is to provide current and reliable data on fertility and family planning behaviour, child mortality, children’s nutritional status, and the utilisation of maternal and child health services in Ghana. Additional data on knowledge of HIV/AIDS are also provided. This information is essential for informed policy decisions, planning and monitoring and evaluation of programmes at both the national and local government levels.

The long-term objectives of the survey include strengthening the technical capacity of the Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) to plan, conduct, process, and analyse the results of complex national sample surveys. Moreover, the 1998 GDHS provides comparable data for long-term trend analyses within Ghana, since it is the third in a series of demographic and health surveys implemented by the same organisation, using similar data collection procedures. The GDHS also contributes to the ever-growing international database on demographic and health-related variables.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

• Household
• Children under five years
• Women age 15-49
• Men age 15-59

Kind of data

Sample survey data

Sampling procedure

The major focus of the 1998 GDHS was to provide updated estimates of important population and health indicators including fertility and mortality rates for the country as a whole and for urban and rural areas separately. In addition, the sample was designed to provide estimates of key variables for the ten regions in the country.

The list of Enumeration Areas (EAs) with population and household information from the 1984 Population Census was used as the sampling frame for the survey. The 1998 GDHS is based on a two-stage stratified nationally representative sample of households. At the first stage of sampling, 400 EAs were selected using systematic sampling with probability proportional to size (PPS-Method). The selected EAs comprised 138 in the urban areas and 262 in the rural areas. A complete household listing operation was then carried out in all the selected EAs to provide a sampling frame for the second stage selection of households. At the second stage of sampling, a systematic sample of 15 households per EA was selected in all regions, except in the Northern, Upper West and Upper East Regions. In order to obtain adequate numbers of households to provide reliable estimates of key demographic and health variables in these three regions, the number of households in each selected EA in the Northern, Upper West and Upper East regions was increased to 20. The sample was weighted to adjust for over sampling in the three northern regions (Northern, Upper East and Upper West), in relation to the other regions. Sample weights were used to compensate for the unequal probability of selection between geographically defined strata.

The survey was designed to obtain completed interviews of 4,500 women age 15-49. In addition, all males age 15-59 in every third selected household were interviewed, to obtain a target of 1,500 men. In order to take cognisance of non-response, a total of 6,375 households nation-wide were selected.

Note: See detailed description of sample design in APPENDIX A of the survey report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face

Research instrument

Three types of questionnaires were used in the GDHS: the Household Questionnaire, the Women’s Questionnaire, and the Men’s Questionnaire. These questionnaires were based on model survey instruments developed for the international MEASURE DHS+ programme and were designed to provide information needed by health and family planning programme managers and policy makers. The questionnaires were adapted to the situation in Ghana and a number of questions pertaining to on-going health and family planning programmes were added. These questionnaires were developed in English and translated into five major local languages (Akan, Ga, Ewe, Hausa, and Dagbani).

The Household Questionnaire was used to enumerate all usual members and visitors in a selected household and to collect information on the socio-economic status of the household. The first part of the Household Questionnaire collected information on the relationship to the household head, residence, sex, age, marital status, and education of each usual resident or visitor. This information was used to identify women and men who were eligible for the individual interview. For this purpose, all women age 15-49, and all men age 15-59 in every third household, whether usual residents of a selected household or visitors who slept in a selected household the night before the interview, were deemed eligible and interviewed. The Household Questionnaire also provides basic demographic data for Ghanaian households. The second part of the Household Questionnaire contained questions on the dwelling unit, such as the number of rooms, the flooring material, the source of water and the type of toilet facilities, and on the ownership of a variety of consumer goods.

The Women’s Questionnaire was used to collect information on the following topics: respondent’s background characteristics, reproductive history, contraceptive knowledge and use, antenatal, delivery and postnatal care, infant feeding practices, child immunisation and health, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, husband’s background characteristics, women’s work, knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STDs, as well as anthropometric measurements of children and mothers.

The Men’s Questionnaire collected information on respondent’s background characteristics, reproduction, contraceptive knowledge and use, marriage, fertility preferences and attitudes about family planning, as well as knowledge of HIV/AIDS and STDs.

Response rate

A total of 6,375 households were selected for the GDHS sample. Of these, 6,055 were occupied. Interviews were completed for 6,003 households, which represent 99 percent of the occupied households. A total of 4,970 eligible women from these households and 1,596 eligible men from every third household were identified for the individual interviews. Interviews were successfully completed for 4,843 women or 97 percent and 1,546 men or 97 percent. The principal reason for nonresponse among individual women and men was the failure of interviewers to find them at home despite repeated callbacks.

Note: See summarized response rates by place of residence in Table 1.1 of the survey report.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) nonsampling errors, and (2) sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of shortfalls made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 1998 GDHS to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to evaluate statistically.

Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents selected in the 1998 GDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

A sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design.

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 1998 GDHS sample is the result of a two-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 1998 GDHS is the ISSA Sampling Error Module. This module uses the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed men - Completeness of reporting - Births by calendar years - Reporting of age at death in days - Reporting of age at death in months

Note: See detailed tables in APPENDIX C of the survey report.

Survey on Equipment and Use of Information and Communication Technologies in Households: Persons who, in the last 3 months, have taken some sort of technological security precaution measure, by demographic characteristics and types of measures. National.

The National Health Examination Surveys, Cycle I (NHES I), conducted during the period 1959-1962, were designed to secure statistics on the health status of the population of the United States. More specifically, their purpose was to determine the prevalence of certain chronic diseases, the status of dental health, and the distributions of auditory and visual acuity and certain anthropometric measurements. This collection contains demographic, household, and personal information for each sample person including age, race, sex, income, region, size of residence, usual activity, and sampling weight. Also included are responses to 12 items from a medical history questionnaire that were selected as indicators of psychological distress. The items include past experiences with such symptoms as faintness, sleeping problems, and sweaty hands.

Description and PurposeThese data include the individual responses for the City of Tempe Annual Community Survey conducted by ETC Institute. These data help determine priorities for the community as part of the City's on-going strategic planning process. Averaged Community Survey results are used as indicators for several city performance measures. The summary data for each performance measure is provided as an open dataset for that measure (separate from this dataset). The performance measures with indicators from the survey include the following (as of 2022):1. Safe and Secure Communities1.04 Fire Services Satisfaction1.06 Crime Reporting1.07 Police Services Satisfaction1.09 Victim of Crime1.10 Worry About Being a Victim1.11 Feeling Safe in City Facilities1.23 Feeling of Safety in Parks2. Strong Community Connections2.02 Customer Service Satisfaction2.04 City Website Satisfaction2.05 Online Services Satisfaction Rate2.15 Feeling Invited to Participate in City Decisions2.21 Satisfaction with Availability of City Information3. Quality of Life3.16 City Recreation, Arts, and Cultural Centers3.17 Community Services Programs3.19 Value of Special Events3.23 Right of Way Landscape Maintenance3.36 Quality of City Services4. Sustainable Growth & DevelopmentNo Performance Measures in this category presently relate directly to the Community Survey5. Financial Stability & VitalityNo Performance Measures in this category presently relate directly to the Community SurveyMethodsThe survey is mailed to a random sample of households in the City of Tempe. Follow up emails and texts are also sent to encourage participation. A link to the survey is provided with each communication. To prevent people who do not live in Tempe or who were not selected as part of the random sample from completing the survey, everyone who completed the survey was required to provide their address. These addresses were then matched to those used for the random representative sample. If the respondent’s address did not match, the response was not used. To better understand how services are being delivered across the city, individual results were mapped to determine overall distribution across the city. Additionally, demographic data were used to monitor the distribution of responses to ensure the responding population of each survey is representative of city population. Processing and LimitationsThe location data in this dataset is generalized to the block level to protect privacy. This means that only the first two digits of an address are used to map the location. When they data are shared with the city only the latitude/longitude of the block level address points are provided. This results in points that overlap. In order to better visualize the data, overlapping points were randomly dispersed to remove overlap. The result of these two adjustments ensure that they are not related to a specific address, but are still close enough to allow insights about service delivery in different areas of the city. This data is the weighted data provided by the ETC Institute, which is used in the final published PDF report.The 2022 Annual Community Survey report is available on data.tempe.gov. The individual survey questions as well as the definition of the response scale (for example, 1 means “very dissatisfied” and 5 means “very satisfied”) are provided in the data dictionary.Additional InformationSource: Community Attitude SurveyContact (author): Wydale HolmesContact E-Mail (author): wydale_holmes@tempe.govContact (maintainer): Wydale HolmesContact E-Mail (maintainer): wydale_holmes@tempe.govData Source Type: Excel tablePreparation Method: Data received from vendor after report is completedPublish Frequency: AnnualPublish Method: ManualData Dictionary

This layer was developed by the Research & Analytics Division of the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent.

The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2014-2018). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available.

For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.

For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.

Naming conventions:

Prefixes:

None

Count

p

Percent

r

Rate

m

Median

a

Mean (average)

t

Aggregate (total)

ch

Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)

pch

Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)

chp

Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)

s

Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% Confidence Interval, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed

Suffixes:

_e18

Estimate from 2014-18 ACS

_m18

Margin of Error from 2014-18 ACS

_00_v18

Decennial 2000 in 2018 geography boundary

_00_18

Change, 2000-18

_e10_v18

Estimate from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_m10_v18

Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

_e10_18

Change, 2010-18

These data files consist of demographic measures taken on marked plants of the federally endangered Dicerandra christmanii from natural populations (in open gaps and roadsides), an augmented population, and introduced population. Data were collected from seven populations across two sites from 199 –2018 although populations were initiated in different years.Â

This layer was developed by the Research & Analytics Group at the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.Naming conventions:Prefixes:NoneCountpPercentrRatemMedianaMean (average)tAggregate (total)chChange in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)pchPercent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)chpChange in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)sSignificance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% CI, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computedSuffixes:_e19Estimate from 2014-19 ACS_m19Margin of Error from 2014-19 ACS_00_v19Decennial 2000, re-estimated to 2019 geography_00_19Change, 2000-19_e10_v192006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2019 geography_m10_v19Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2019 geography_e10_19Change, 2010-19The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent.The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2015-2019). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available.For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Atlanta Regional CommissionDate: 2015-2019Data License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC by 4.0)Link to the manifest: https://www.arcgis.com/sharing/rest/content/items/3d489c725bb24f52a987b302147c46ee/data

This dataset contains data for the Healthcare Payments Data (HPD) Healthcare Measures report. The data cover three measurement categories: Health conditions, Utilization, and Demographics. The health condition measurements quantify the prevalence of long-term illnesses and major medical events prominent in California’s communities like diabetes and heart failure. Utilization measures convey rates of healthcare system use through visits to the emergency department and different categories of inpatient stays, such as maternity or surgical stays. The demographic measures describe the health coverage and other characteristics (e.g., age) of the Californians included in the data and represented in the other measures. The data include both a count or sum of each measure and a count of the base population so that data users can calculate the percentages, rates, and averages in the visualization. Measures are grouped by year, age band, sex (assigned sex at birth), payer type, Covered California Region, and county.

This is a historical measure for Strategic Direction 2023. For more data on Austin demographics please visit austintexas.gov/demographics. This measure answers the question of what is the rate of change for the share of the total city population that is African-American. Calculated the difference of percentage of share over reporting period. Data collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, American Communities Survey (ACS) (1-yr), Race (table B02001), except for 2020 data, which are from the 2020 Decennial Census Count. American Communities Survey is a survey with sampled statistics on the citywide level and is subject to a margin of error. ACS sample size and data quality measures can be found on the U.S. Census website in the Methodology section. View more details and insights related to this data set on the story page: https://data.austintexas.gov/stories/s/6p8t-s826

This dataset contains measures of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics by US census tract for the years 2000-2010. Example measures include population density; population distribution by race, ethnicity, age, and income; and proportion of population living below the poverty level, receiving public assistance, and female-headed families. The dataset also contains a set of index variables to represent neighborhood disadvantage and affluence. Data may be combined with geocoded individual-level health data to explore how neighborhood socioeconomic status and demographics affect health and other outcomes.

The Los Angeles Index of Neighborhood Change is a tool that allows users to explore the extent to which Los Angeles Zip Codes have undergone demographic change from 2000 to 2014. Created in 2015/2016, the data comes from 2000, 2005, 2013, and 2014. Please read details about each measure for exact years.Index scores are an aggregate of six demographic measures indicative of gentrification. The measures are standardized and combined using weights that reflect the proportion of each measure that is statistically significant.Measure 1: Percent change in low/high IRS filer ratio. For the purposes of this measure, High Income = >$75K Adjust Gross Income tax filer and Low Income = <$25k filers who also received an earned income tax credit. Years Compared for Measure 1: 2005 and 2013 | Source: IRS Income Tax Return DataMeasure 2: Change in percent of residents 25 years or older with Bachelor's Degrees or HigherMeasure 3: Change in percent of White, non-Hispanic/Latino residentsMeasure 4: Percent change in median household income (2000 income is adjusted to 2014 dollars)Measure 5: % Change in median gross rent (2000 rent is adjusted to 2013/2014 dollars)Measure 6: Percent change in average household size Year Compared for Measures 2-5: 2000 and 2014, Measure 6: 2013Sources: Decennial Census, 2000 | American Community Survey (5-Year Estimate, 2009-2013; 2010; 2014)Date Updated: December 13, 2016Refresh Rate: Never - Historical data