This data represents the age-adjusted prevalence of high total cholesterol, hypertension, and obesity among US adults aged 20 and over between 1999-2000 to 2017-2018. Notes: All estimates are age adjusted by the direct method to the U.S. Census 2000 population using age groups 20–39, 40–59, and 60 and over. Definitions Hypertension: Systolic blood pressure greater than or equal to 130 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure greater than or equal to 80 mmHg, or currently taking medication to lower high blood pressure High total cholesterol: Serum total cholesterol greater than or equal to 240 mg/dL. Obesity: Body mass index (BMI, weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) greater than or equal to 30. Data Source and Methods Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) for the years 1999–2000, 2001–2002, 2003–2004, 2005–2006, 2007–2008, 2009–2010, 2011–2012, 2013–2014, 2015–2016, and 2017–2018 were used for these analyses. NHANES is a cross-sectional survey designed to monitor the health and nutritional status of the civilian noninstitutionalized U.S. population. The survey consists of interviews conducted in participants’ homes and standardized physical examinations, including a blood draw, conducted in mobile examination centers.

Abstract

The Afrobarometer is a comparative series of public attitude surveys that assess African citizen's attitudes to democracy and governance, markets, and civil society, among other topics. The surveys have been undertaken at periodic intervals since 1999. The Afrobarometer's coverage has increased over time. Round 1 (1999-2001) initially covered 7 countries and was later extended to 12 countries. Round 2 (2002-2004) surveyed citizens in 16 countries. Round 3 (2005-2006) 18 countries, Round 4 (2008) 20 countries, Round 5 (2011-2013) 34 countries, Round 6 (2014-2015) 36 countries, and Round 7 (2016-2018) 34 countries. The survey covered 34 countries in Round 8 (2019-2021).

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Individual

Universe

The sample universe for Afrobarometer surveys includes all citizens of voting age within the country. In other words, we exclude anyone who is not a citizen and anyone who has not attained this age (usually 18 years) on the day of the survey. Also excluded are areas determined to be either inaccessible or not relevant to the study, such as those experiencing armed conflict or natural disasters, as well as national parks and game reserves. As a matter of practice, we have also excluded people living in institutionalized settings, such as students in dormitories and persons in prisons or nursing homes.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Afrobarometer Sampling Procedure

Afrobarometer uses national probability samples designed to meet the following criteria. Samples are designed to generate a sample that is a representative cross-section of all citizens of voting age in a given country. The goal is to give every adult citizen an equal and known chance of being selected for an interview. They achieve this by:

• using random selection methods at every stage of sampling; • sampling at all stages with probability proportionate to population size wherever possible to ensure that larger (i.e., more populated) geographic units have a proportionally greater probability of being chosen into the sample.

The sampling universe normally includes all citizens age 18 and older. As a standard practice, we exclude people living in institutionalized settings, such as students in dormitories, patients in hospitals, and persons in prisons or nursing homes. Occasionally, we must also exclude people living in areas determined to be inaccessible due to conflict or insecurity. Any such exclusion is noted in the technical information report (TIR) that accompanies each data set.

Sample size and design Samples usually include either 1,200 or 2,400 cases. A randomly selected sample of n=1200 cases allows inferences to national adult populations with a margin of sampling error of no more than +/-2.8% with a confidence level of 95 percent. With a sample size of n=2400, the margin of error decreases to +/-2.0% at 95 percent confidence level.

The sample design is a clustered, stratified, multi-stage, area probability sample. Specifically, we first stratify the sample according to the main sub-national unit of government (state, province, region, etc.) and by urban or rural location.

Area stratification reduces the likelihood that distinctive ethnic or language groups are left out of the sample. Afrobarometer occasionally purposely oversamples certain populations that are politically significant within a country to ensure that the size of the sub-sample is large enough to be analysed. Any oversamples is noted in the TIR.

Sample stages Samples are drawn in either four or five stages:

Stage 1: In rural areas only, the first stage is to draw secondary sampling units (SSUs). SSUs are not used in urban areas, and in some countries they are not used in rural areas. See the TIR that accompanies each data set for specific details on the sample in any given country. Stage 2: We randomly select primary sampling units (PSU). Stage 3: We then randomly select sampling start points. Stage 4: Interviewers then randomly select households. Stage 5: Within the household, the interviewer randomly selects an individual respondent. Each interviewer alternates in each household between interviewing a man and interviewing a woman to ensure gender balance in the sample.

To keep the costs and logistics of fieldwork within manageable limits, eight interviews are clustered within each selected PSU.

Republic of Cabo Verde - Sample size: 1,200 - Sampling Frame: Projecção da população adulta para 2019, feita pelo INE, com base no Recenseamento Geral da População e da Habitação de Cabo Verde de 2010 - Sample design: Nationally representative, random, stratified, multi-stage sample - Stratification: Islands and urban and rural areas - Census selection: Probability Proportionate to Population Size (PPPS) - Cluster size: 8 households per census district - Household selection: Randomly selected start points, followed by walk pattern using 5/10 interval - Respondent selection: Gender quota is ensured by alternating male and female respondents; respondents of the appropriate gender are recorded on the tablet and the tablet randomly selects the person to be interviewed

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The Round 8 questionnaire has been developed by the Questionnaire Committee after reviewing the findings and feedback obtained in previous Rounds, and securing input on preferred new topics from a host of donors, analysts, and users of the data.

The questionnaire consists of three parts: 1. Part 1 captures the steps for selecting households and respondents, and includes the introduction to the respondent and (pp.1-4). This section should be filled in by the Fieldworker. 2. Part 2 covers the core attitudinal and demographic questions that are asked by the Fieldworker and answered by the Respondent (Q1 – Q100). 3. Part 3 includes contextual questions about the setting and atmosphere of the interview, and collects information on the Fieldworker. This section is completed by the Fieldworker (Q101 – Q123).

Response rate

Outcome rates: - Contact rate: 94% - Cooperation rate: 91% - Refusal rate: 5% - Response rate: 85%

Sampling error estimates

+/- 3 % with 95% confidence level

Geocoded for Baltimore City County. The BES Household Survey 2003 is a telephone survey of metropolitan Baltimore residents consisting of 29 questions. The survey research firm, Hollander, Cohen, and McBride conducted the survey, asking respondents questions about their outdoor recreation activities, watershed knowledge, environmental behavior, neighborhood characteristics and quality of life, lawn maintenance, satisfaction with life, neighborhood, and the environment, and demographic information. The data from each respondent is also associated with a PRIZM(r) classification, census block group, and latitude-longitude. PRIZM(r) classifications categorize the American population using Census data, market research surveys, public opinion polls, and point-of-purchase receipts. The PRIZM(r) classification is spatially explicit allowing the survey data to be viewed and analyzed spatially and allowing specific neighborhood types to be identified and compared based on the survey data. The census block group and latitude-longitude data also allow us additional methods of presenting and analyzing the data spatially. The household survey is part of the core data collection of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study to classify and characterize social and ecological dimensions of neighborhoods (patches) over time and across space. This survey is linked to other core data including US Census data, remotely-sensed data, and field data collection, including the BES DemSoc Field Observation Survey. The BES 2003 telephone survey was conducted by Hollander, Cohen, and McBride from September 1-30, 2003. The sample was obtained from the professional sampling firm Claritas, in order that their "PRIZM" encoding would be appended to each piece of sample (telephone number) supplied. Mailing addresses were also obtained so that a postcard could be sent in advance of interviewers calling. The postcard briefly informed potential respondents about the survey, who was conducting it, and that they might receive a phone call in the next few weeks. A stratified sampling method was used to obtain between 50 - 150 respondents in each of the 15 main PRIZM classifications. This allows direct comparison of PRIZM classifications. Analysis of the data for the general metropolitan Baltimore area must be weighted to match the population proportions normally found in the region. They obtained a total of 9000 telephone numbers in the sample. All 9,000 numbers were dialed but contact was only made on 4,880. 1508 completed an interview, 2524 refused immediately, 147 broke off/incomplete, 84 respondents had moved and were no longer in the correct location, and a qualified respondent was not available on 617 calls. This resulted in a response rate of 36.1% compared with a response rate of 28.2% in 2000. The CATI software (Computer Assisted Terminal Interviewing) randomized the random sample supplied, and was programmed for at least 3 attempted callbacks per number, with emphasis on pulling available callback sample prior to accessing uncalled numbers. Calling was conducted only during evening and weekend hours, when most head of households are home. The use of CATI facilitated stratified sampling on PRIZM classifications, centralized data collection, standardized interviewer training, and reduced the overall cost of primary data collection. Additionally, to reduce respondent burden, the questionnaire was revised to be concise, easy to understand, minimize the use of open-ended responses, and require an average of 15 minutes to complete. The household survey is part of the core data collection of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study to classify and characterize social and ecological dimensions of neighborhoods (patches) over time and across space. This survey is linked to other core data, including US Census data, remotely-sensed data, and field data collection, including the BES DemSoc Field Observation Survey. Additional documentation of this database is attached to this metadata and includes 4 documents, 1) the telephone survey, 2) documentation of the telephone survey, 3) metadata for the telephone survey, and 4) a description of the attribute data in the BES survey 2003 survey. This database was created by joining the GDT geographic database of US Census Block Group geographies for the Baltimore Metropolitan Statisticsal Area (MSA), with the Claritas PRIZM database, 2003, of unique classifications of each Census Block Group, and the unique PRIZM code for each respondent from the BES Household Telephone Survey, 2003. The GDT database is preferred and used because of its higher spatial accuracy than other databases describing US Census geographies, including those provided by the US Census. This database includes data only for environmental behaviors: How likely would you be to take part in the following efforts to improve and maintain the quality of the watershe... Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/knb-lter-bes.335.570 for complete metadata about this dataset.

Tags

   survey, environmental behaviors, lifestyle, status, PRIZM, Baltimore Ecosystem Study, LTER, BES




   Summary


   BES Research, Applications, and Education


   Description


   XY Positions for BES telephone survey. The BES Household Survey 2003 is a telephone survey of metropolitan Baltimore residents consisting of 29 questions. The survey research firm, Hollander, Cohen, and McBride conducted the survey, asking respondents questions about their outdoor recreation activities, watershed knowledge, environmental behavior, neighborhood characteristics and quality of life, lawn maintenance, satisfaction with life, neighborhood, and the environment, and demographic information. The data from each respondent is also associated with a PRIZM� classification, census block group, and latitude-longitude. PRIZM� classifications categorize the American population using Census data, market research surveys, public opinion polls, and point-of-purchase receipts. The PRIZM� classification is spatially explicit allowing the survey data to be viewed and analyzed spatially and allowing specific neighborhood types to be identified and compared based on the survey data. The census block group and latitude-longitude data also allow us additional methods of presenting and analyzing the data spatially. 


   The household survey is part of the core data collection of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study to classify and characterize social and ecological dimensions of neighborhoods (patches) over time and across space. This survey is linked to other core data including US Census data, remotely-sensed data, and field data collection, including the BES DemSoc Field Observation Survey. 



   The BES 2003 telephone survey was conducted by Hollander, Cohen, and McBride from September 1-30, 2003. The sample was obtained from the professional sampling firm Claritas, in order that their "PRIZM" encoding would be appended to each piece of sample (telephone number) supplied. Mailing addresses were also obtained so that a postcard could be sent in advance of interviewers calling. The postcard briefly informed potential respondents about the survey, who was conducting it, and that they might receive a phone call in the next few weeks. A stratified sampling method was used to obtain between 50 - 150 respondents in each of the 15 main PRIZM classifications. This allows direct comparison of PRIZM classifications. Analysis of the data for the general metropolitan Baltimore area must be weighted to match the population proportions normally found in the region. They obtained a total of 9000 telephone numbers in the sample. All 9,000 numbers were dialed but contact was only made on 4,880. 1508 completed an interview, 2524 refused immediately, 147 broke off/incomplete, 84 respondents had moved and were no longer in the correct location, and a qualified respondent was not available on 617 calls. This resulted in a response rate of 36.1% compared with a response rate of 28.2% in 2000. The CATI software (Computer Assisted Terminal Interviewing) randomized the random sample supplied, and was programmed for at least 3 attempted callbacks per number, with emphasis on pulling available callback sample prior to accessing uncalled numbers. Calling was conducted only during evening and weekend hours, when most head of households are home. The use of CATI facilitated stratified sampling on PRIZM classifications, centralized data collection, standardized interviewer training, and reduced the overall cost of primary data collection. Additionally, to reduce respondent burden, the questionnaire was revised to be concise, easy to understand, minimize the use of open-ended responses, and require an average of 15 minutes to complete. 


   The household survey is part of the core data collection of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study to classify and characterize social and ecological dimensions of neighborhoods (patches) over time and across space. This survey is linked to other core data, including US Census data, remotely-sensed data, and field data collection, including the BES DemSoc Field Observation Survey. 


   Additional documentation of this database is attached to this metadata and includes 4 documents, 1) the telephone survey, 2) documentation of the telephone survey, 3) metadata for the telephone survey, and 4) a description of the attribute data in the BES survey 2003 survey.


   This database was created by joining the GDT geographic database of US Census Block Group geographies for the Baltimore Metropolitan Statisticsal Area (MSA), with the Claritas PRIZM database, 2003, of unique classifications of each Census Block Group, and the unique PRIZM code for each respondent from the BES Household Telephone Survey, 2003. The GDT database is preferred and used

The U.S. Census Bureau, in collaboration with five federal agencies, launched the Household Pulse Survey to produce data on the social and economic impacts of Covid-19 on American households. The Household Pulse Survey was designed to gauge the impact of the pandemic on employment status, consumer spending, food security, housing, education disruptions, and dimensions of physical and mental wellness.

The survey was designed to meet the goal of accurate and timely weekly estimates. It was conducted by an internet questionnaire, with invitations to participate sent by email and text message. The sample frame is the Census Bureau Master Address File Data. Housing units linked to one or more email addresses or cell phone numbers were randomly selected to participate, and one respondent from each housing unit was selected to respond for him or herself. Estimates are weighted to adjust for nonresponse and to match Census Bureau estimates of the population by age, sex, race and ethnicity, and educational attainment. All estimates shown meet the NCHS Data Presentation Standards for Proportions.

Between Oct. 14, 2014, and May 21, 2015, Pew Research Center, with generous funding from The Pew Charitable Trusts and the Neubauer Family Foundation, completed 5,601 face-to-face interviews with non-institutionalized adults ages 18 and older living in Israel.

The survey sampling plan was based on six districts defined in the 2008 Israeli census. In addition, Jewish residents of West Bank (Judea and Samaria) were included.

The sample includes interviews with 3,789 respondents defined as Jews, 871 Muslims, 468 Christians and 439 Druze. An additional 34 respondents belong to other religions or are religiously unaffiliated. Five groups were oversampled as part of the survey design: Jews living in the West Bank, Haredim, Christian Arabs, Arabs living in East Jerusalem and Druze.

Interviews were conducted under the direction of Public Opinion and Marketing Research of Israel (PORI). Surveys were administered through face-to-face, paper and pencil interviews conducted at the respondent's place of residence. Sampling was conducted through a multi-stage stratified area probability sampling design based on national population data available through the Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics' 2008 census.

The questionnaire was designed by Pew Research Center staff in consultation with subject matter experts and advisers to the project. The questionnaire was translated into Hebrew, Russian and Arabic, independently verified by professional linguists conversant in regional dialects and pretested prior to fieldwork.

The questionnaire was divided into four sections. All respondents who took the survey in Russian or Hebrew were branched into the Jewish questionnaire (Questionnaire A). Arabic-speaking respondents were branched into the Muslim (Questionnaire B), Christian (Questionnaire C) or Druze questionnaire (D) based on their response to the religious identification question. For the full question wording and exact order of questions, please see the questionnaire.

Note that not all respondents who took the questionnaire in Hebrew or Russian are classified as Jews in this study. For further details on how respondents were classified as Jews, Muslims, Christians and Druze in the study, please see sidebar in the report titled "http://www.pewforum.org/2016/03/08/israels-religiously-divided-society/" Target="_blank">"How Religious are Defined".

Following fieldwork, survey performance was assessed by comparing the results for key demographic variables with population statistics available through the census. Data were weighted to account for different probabilities of selection among respondents. Where appropriate, data also were weighted through an iterative procedure to more closely align the samples with official population figures for gender, age and education. The reported margins of sampling error and the statistical tests of significance used in the analysis take into account the design effects due to weighting and sample design.

In addition to sampling error and other practical difficulties, one should bear in mind that question wording also can have an impact on the findings of opinion polls.

These surveys of Macedonian public opinion were conducted on behalf of the International Republican Institute by the Brima market research firm. The surveys includes questions concerning general attitudes toward the government, the internal political situation in Macedonia (2015-2016), the implementation of the Przino Agreement and so forth.

Data was collected over four time periods (June 6-15, 2015/ Sept 29-October 5, 2015 / January 16-27, 2016 / April 19-25, 2016) using in-person, face-to-face methodology by trained professional interviewers.

The sample was prepared using the State Statistical Office data (2002 census results) for the population aged 18 and older, considering the structure of the population according to age, gender, education, type of housing, national affiliation and region and updated according to estimates and primary information, collected by Brima.

Stratification was based on three stages: first, the number of respondents for each of the regions was specified in proportion to the size of the population aged 18 and older that live in it. Second, the sampling plan consisted of 164 sampling points located according to urban/rural split, municipality size and nationality diffusion. Third, the selection of households was based on random route method, whereby in urban areas, every third household on the left-hand side of the street was selected. In rural areas, the wave-wise approach is applied and the selected household is every fourth inhabited house/dwelling on both sides of the interviewer’s route/track, counting from the first house on the left.

This poll was conducted with support from the United States Agency for International Development.

Abstract

The National Sustainable Development Plan (NSDP) Baseline Survey 2019 is an expanded Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) and is inclusive of health educational, cultural, and productive dimensions previously uncollected or in need of updating. The results of this survey will inform directly more than 30 key indicators listed in the NSDP M&E (Monitoring and Evaluation) Framework, as well as more than 40 of the listed indicators for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The NSDP Baseline Survey presents an opportunity as well for Vanuatu to establish a comprehensive Melanesian Wellbeing baseline as well as an updated baseline for the calculation of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and revising National Accounts.

Geographic coverage

National coverage. Below are the details of this national coverage: 1. National (Vanuatu); 2. Provinces (Torba, Sanma, Penama, Malampa, Shefa, Tafea); 4. Area Councils (Torres Area council right to Futuna & Aneityum Area Council); 5. Villages / Towns; 6. Urban/Rural.

Analysis unit

Household and Individual.

Universe

All de jure residents.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample size for this survey was determined using the previous 2010 Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) outputs, and especially the per capita monthly total expenditure. From the 2010 HIES the mean, standard deviation and standard error were computed (per capita expenditure) and from the 2016 Census the distribution of the population across the 6 provinces of Vanuatu was used as a base. According to the accuracy of this variable of interest within each province the sample size per province were adjusted in order to get an expected sampling error around 5% within each province. The sampling frame used is the last 2016 Vanuatu census for the computation of the probability of selection of the Enumeration Areas (EAs) and the random selection method started with the random selection of EAs using the probability proportional to size. Then within each selected EAs 10 households were randomly selected using the sampling uniformed method. Within each selected EA the household listing were updated by the team before random selection and interview.

i) The only variable considered is per capita total household expenditure (variable of interest), as in addition to being one of the main indicators derived from the Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES), it is likely highly correlated with many other variables of interest (e.g. poverty). From the 2010 HIES dataset, using this variable of interest, a list of relevant indicators were calculated, those indicators provide information on: - (a)the status of the household expenditure distribution within each province, - (b) The efficiency provided by the 2010 HIES sample design - (c) The accuracy of the estimates calculated from the 2010 HIES dataset (especially the per capita household expenditure, our variable or interest)

ii) The original dataset has been trimmed using the variable of interest, the lowest and the highest percentiles (the 1% households with the lowest and highest per capita total household expenditure) were removed from the analysis (outliers). The dataset ends up with 4,289 households (given 4,377 households were completed).

iii) The 2010 Vanuatu HIES sample was based on a stratified multi stages selection - Stratification: geographical provinces (by urban / rural locations) - First stage of selection: Enumerations Areas (EAs) with probability of selection proportional to size - Second stage: households, with uniform probability of selection within the EAs

iv) The mean and standard deviation indicate the status of the variable of interest within each strata. The intracluster correlation (p), and the design effect (DEFF) highlight the efficiency of the sampling strategy, and the standard error/relative standard error (SE/RSE) of the variable of interest show its accuracy.

v) The purpose of this analysis is to get some insights from the 2010 HIES sample design in order to improve the 2019 survey. There is no point to improve the sample size in strata where the sample is not efficient (the gain in accuracy will be minor compared to the related cost).

vi) The challenge in the 2019 Vanuatu baseline survey: - Meet precision targets in each strata (provincial level) including Penama where Ambae island has been evacuated at the time of the sample design. - Acceptable sample size (due to budget constraints) - Following international recommendations (12 months of field operation) - Enhance the monitoring and supervision of the field staff and simplify management of the logistics in the field

==> Optimize the variance/cost ratio of the survey design vii) Table 1 from the Document Sample Design (provided as External Resources) presents the Vanuatu 2010 HIES survey specifications, efficiency and accuracy in each strata (for the variable of interest). It shows that some improvements can be done in Torba, and Shefa rural (where the RSE is higher than 5%), and it shows a high intraclass correlation in Malampa, Shefa rural and Tafea (that lead to a high design effect in those strata). In Torba, the high design effect comes from the high number of households interviewed in each selected EA (on average 33 households per selected EA in this strata were interviewed). - Torba: the sample size is good, there is just a need to reduce the number of households to interview within each strata (and in order to keep a similar sample size the number of EAs to select in the province will be increased) - Malampa: given the high intracluster correlation in this province, a higher number of EAs to select is required (with the same number of households per EA to interview). - Shefa rural: keep the same number of households to interview within each EA, and increase the number of EA to select (this will lead to a higher sample size) - Tafea: similar to Malampa province, the high intraclass correlation indicates that the number of EAs to select has to be increased (therefore the sample size as well). The sample size has to be increased in Malampa, Shefa rural and Tafea, for the rest, the 2019 design will have to be similar as 2010 (in order to provide at least the same level of accuracy). viii) The 2019 Vanuatu base line survey follows the international recommendations in terms of data collection schedule (12-month coverage) and considers a better management and supervision of the field staff. In this context, the field staff will work by team, given that: - A team is made of 1 supervisor (team leader) and 2 or 3 interviewers - Each interviewer will be responsible for 5 interview per round - A round of survey is a 1 week period - 1 EA is covered during 1 round, after the round completion, the team moves to the next EA for the next round. - A team complete 32 rounds during the 12 month field operation period (roughly every 2 rounds/2 weeks) of work is followed by 1 round/1 week of rest). ix) Table 3 from the Document Sample Design (provided as External Resources) presents a survey schedule starting February 2019 and ending February 2020. During this period of 32 working weeks (corresponding to 32 different selected EAs) the teams will be on the field (a 3 weeks period of rest during Christmas period).

x) The number of interviewer by team and number of team by province will determine the total sample size within each province. A team made of 3 interviewers can achieve 480 households over the period, while a team of 2 interviewers can achieve only 320 cases.

xi) The intraclass correlation is used to calculate the precision loss due to clustering. Like the standard deviation, the intracluster correlation is considered to be a true population parameter, and therefore transferable between designs. We have to accept the hypothesis that this correlation factor has not changed during the period 2010-2019, and therefore can be used to predict DEFF and RSE for the next survey given an adjusted design (based on the conclusions provided by the 2010 design). Table 2 from the Document Sample Design (provided as External Resources) predicts the design effect and sampling error of the variable of interest given the new sample design that is based on: - the sample size within each strata - the number of teams within each strata - the number of interviewers per team In order to allow more flexibility in the sample size, it is preferable to set up some teams of 3 interviewers, that can achieve 480 households, which represent a good sample size for Torba and Sanma urban and some teams of 2 interviewers that will achieve 320 households each (2 teams will be required in other provinces).

xii) The proposed design in Table 2 from the Document Sample Design (provided as External Resources) shows a total sample size of 4,640 households and a higher level of accuracy of the estimate of the variable of interest in all the stratas. Only Shefa rural shows a RSE higher than 5%, which will be still acceptable. The high intraclass correlation in Shefa rural impacts the variance of the estimates and lead to an increase the sample size or a decrease of the number of households to interview per EA which is logistically and financially not recommended.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

The questionnaire was developed in English using the World Bank software Survey Solutions. This questionnaire is divided into 18 modules that are detailed below.

-Introduction (geographic areas, list of household members) -Module 1: Demographic characteristics: ethnicity, marital status; -Module 2: Wellbeing: culture

Abstract

The Integrated Living Conditions Survey (ILCS), conducted annually by the NSS National Statistical Service of the Republic of Armenia, formed the basis for monitoring living conditions in Armenia. The ILCS is a universally recognized best-practice survey for collecting data to inform about the living standards of households. The ILCS comprises comprehensive and valuable data on the welfare of households and separate individuals which gives the NSS an opportunity to provide the public with up to date information on the population’s income, expenditures, the level of poverty and the other changes in living standards on an annual basis.

Geographic coverage

Urban and rural communities

Analysis unit

• Households;
• Individuals.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

During the 2001-2003 surveys two-stage random sample was used; the first stage covered the selection of settlements - cities and villages, while the second stage was focused on the selection of households in these settlements. The surveys were conducted on the principle of monthly rotation of households by clusters (sample units). In 2002 and 2003 the number of households was 387 with the sample covering 14 cities and 30 villages in 2002 and 17 cities and 20 villages in 2003.

During the 2004-2006 surveys the sampling frame for the ILCS was built using the database of addresses for the 2001 Population Census; the database was developed with the World Bank technical assistance. The database of addresses of all households in Armenia was divided into 48 strata including 12 communities of Yerevan city. The households from other regions (marzes) were grouped according to the following three categories: big towns with 15,000 and more population; villages, and other towns. Big towns formed 16 strata (the only exception was the Vayots Dzor marz where there are no big towns). The villages and other towns formed 10 strata each. According to this division, a random, two-step sample stratified at marz level was developed. All marzes, as well as all urban and rural settlements were included in the sample population according to the share of population residing in those settlements as percent to the total population in the country. In the first step, the settlements, i.e. primary sample units, were selected: 43 towns out of 48 or 90 percent of all towns in Armenia were surveyed during the year; also 216 villages out of 951 or 23 percent of all villages in the country were covered by the survey. In the second step, the respondent households were selected: 6,816 households (5,088 from urban and 1,728 from rural settlements). As a result, for the first time since 1996 survey data were representative at the marz level.

During the 2007-2012 surveys the sampling frame for ILCS was designed according to the database of addresses for the 2001 Population Census, which was developed with the World Bank technical assistance. The sample consisted of two parts: core sample and oversample.

1) For the creation of core sample, the sample frame (database of addresses of all households in Armenia) was divided into 48 strata including 12 communities of Yerevan city. The households from other regions (marzes) were grouped according to three categories: large towns (with population of 15000 and higher), villages and other towns. Large towns formed by 16 groups (strata), while the villages and towns formed by 10 strata each. According to that division, a random, two-step sample stratified at the marz level was developed. All marzes, as well as all urban and rural settlements were included in the sample population according to the share of households residing in those settlements as percent to the total households in the country. In the first step, using the PPS method the enumeration units (i.e., primary sample units to be surveyed during the year) were selected. 2007 sample includes 48 urban and 18 rural enumeration areas per month. 2) The oversample was drawn from the list of villages included in MCA-Armenia Rural Roads Rehabilitation Project. The enumeration areas of villages that were already in the core sample were excluded from that list. From the remaining enumeration areas 18 enumeration areas were selected per month. Thus, the rural sample size was doubled. 3) After merging the core sample and oversample, the survey households were selected in the second step. 656 households were surveyed per month, from which 368 from urban and 288 from rural settlements. Each month 82 interviewers had conducted field work, and their workload included 8 households per month. In 2007 number of surveyed households was 7,872 (4,416 from urban and 3,456 from rural areas).

For the survey 2013 the sample frame for ILCS was designed in accordance with the database of addresses of all private households in the country developed on basis of the 2001 Population Census results, with the technical assistance of the World Bank. The method of systematic representative probability sampling was used to frame the sample. For the purpose of drawing the sample, the sample frame was divided into 32 strata including 12 communities of Yerevan City (currently, the administrative districts). According to this division, a two-tier sample was drawn stratified by regions and by Yerevan. All regions and Yerevan, as well as all urban and rural communities were included in the sample in accordance to the shares of their resident households within the total number of households in the country. In the first round, enumeration areas - that is primary sample units to be surveyed during the year - were selected. The ILCS 2013 sample included 32 enumeration areas in urban and 16 enumeration areas in rural communities per month. The households to be surveyed were selected in the second round. A total of 432 households were surveyed per month, of which 279 and 153 households from urban and rural communities, respectively. Every month 48 interviewers went on field work with a workload of 9 households per month.

The sample frame for 2014-2016 was designed in accordance with the database of addresses of all private households in the country developed on basis of the 2011 Population Census results, with the technical assistance of the World Bank. The method of systematic representative probability sampling was used to frame the sample.
For drawing the sample, the sample frame was divided into 32 strata including 12 communities of Yerevan City (currently, the administrative districts). According to this division, a two-tier sample was drawn stratified by regions and by Yerevan. All regions and Yerevan, as well as all urban and rural communities were included in the sample in accordance to the shares of their resident households within the total number of households in the country. In the first round, enumeration areas - that is primary sample units to be surveyed during the year - were selected. The ILCS 2014 sample included 30 enumeration areas in urban and 18 enumeration areas in rural communities per month. The method of representative probability sampling was used to frame the sample. At regional level, all communities were grouped into two categories - towns and villages. According to this division, a two-tier sample was drawn stratified by regions and by Yerevan. All regions and Yerevan, as well as all rural and urban communities were included in the sample in accordance to the shares of their resident households within the total number of households in the country. In the first round, enumeration districts - that is primary sample units to be surveyed during the year - were selected. The ILCS 2015 sample included 30 enumeration districts in urban and 18 enumeration districts in rural communities per month.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The Questionnaire is filled in by the interviewer during the least five visits to households per month. During face-to-face interviews with the household head or another knowledgeable adult member, the interviewer collects information on the composition and housing conditions of the household, the employment status, educational level and health condition of the members, availability and use of land, livestock, and agricultural machinery, monetary and commodity flows between households, and other information.

The 2010 survey questionnaire had the following sections: (1) "List of Household Members", (2) "Migration", (3) "Housing and Dwelling Conditions", (4) "Employment", (5) "Education", (6) "Agriculture", (7) "Food Production", (8) "Monetary and Commodity Flows between Households", (9) "Health (General) and Healthcare", (10) "Debts", (11) "Subjective Assessment of Living Conditions", (12) "Provision of Services", (13) "Social Assistance", (14) "Households as Employers for Service Personnel", and (15) "Household Monthly Consumption of Energy Resources".

The Diary is completed directly by the household for one month. Every day the household would record all its expenditures on food, non-food products and services, also giving a detailed description of such purchases; e.g. for food products the name, quantity, cost, and place of purchase of the product is recorded. Besides, the household records its consumption of food products received and used from its own land and livestock, as well as from other sources (e.g. gifts, humanitarian aid). Non-food products and services purchased or received for free are also recorded in the diary. Then, the household records its income received during the month. At the end of the month, information on rarely used food products, durable goods and ceremonies is recorded, as well. The records in the diary are verified by the interviewer in the course of 5

Abstract

During 2018, the National Statistical Agency (NSA) of Namibia received technical assistance from the Global Strategy to Improve Agricultural and Rural Statistics hosted by FAO on the measurement of Post-Harvest Losses (PHL). In this regard, a pilot survey was conducted by NSA in the Kavango West region to compare estimations using subjective and objective methods. The main crops analyzed are millet and maize. Subjective measurement methods included farmer recall, while the objective methods chosen were implemented through crop cutting, and samples of harvested crop analyzed in a lab. Unfortunately, the project ended before the samples were received from the lab, so these data are not available.

The pilot survey was conducted in Kavango West region only and the Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) were derived from the 2013/14 Agricultural Census frame. Staff from the Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry (MAWF), (agricultural technicians as enumerators and agricultural technician as team supervisors) carried out field activities. In total, a sample of 350 farms were enumerated. The data collection took place from May 2018 to August 2018 (30 working days) and included both the subjective and objective measure of the PHL.

Geographic coverage

Regional coverage

Analysis unit

Households

Universe

Agricultural households in the Kavango West region

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The PHL pilot study mainly followed the National Census of Agriculture (NCA) 2013/14 methodology. The NCA 2013/14 used a stratified two stage cluster sample design. At the first stage, primary sampling units (PSUs) were selected with Probability Proportional to Size (PPS) from the sampling frame based on the Enumeration Areas of 2011 Population and Housing Census. The size measure of a PSU in the sampling frame was the number of agricultural households which was derived from the questions included in 2011 Population and Housing Census as per the FAO recommendations.

The list of agricultural households was prepared through the listing process within a selected PSU to compile the sampling frame for agricultural households which was selected systematically.

A third stage of sampling was also conducted to select plots which contained the two main crops, maize, and millet for objective measurement as described below.

A list of plots planted with maize or millet in each sampled PSU was created. Then, one plot was randomly selected from the two main crops of the holder. An area was then marked within the selected plot according to the FAO guidelines and the matured crop inside this marked area was cut and weighed when the crop was wet and dry.

Crop cutting enable estimation of the yield of a crop and the losses during harvesting, threshing/shelling, and cleaning/winnowing. This was done through processing the produce of sub-plots in selected fields. Interviewers did the crop cutting manually according to the techniques used by the farmer. After the manual harvesting was done, the second team of supervisors entered the field and collected all fallen ears/cobs, grains and weighed them after which the information was recorded. These figures are used to estimate the average yields of each of the crops.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Cleaning operations

The dataset received by the Office of Chief Statistician (OCS) team was already cleaned by Aliou Mballo directly with NSA. During the cleaning process, all direct identifiers were removed. Furthermore, the declaration, phyiscal measurement, and storage data for the second crops, were transposed from wide to long. So instead of the farmer declaration variables of the second crop captured by the variables titled from “D6” to “D10-6” in the questionnaire being in their own columns, there is a second row in the dataset containing data from sections C, D, E and G containing data for the second crop, spread across columns “crop_code” to “D5-6”. The same logic applies to the physical measurements and storage data.

The sections CDEG dataset contains data for some crops which do not correspond to records in the Section C dataset on agricultural practices. This is due to a mistake amongst some enumerators which filled in directly Section D for some crops and skipped agricultural practices. This is especially prevelant for measurement data for maize. The data from the lab was not received in time for the project deadline. Accordingly, section “H_Storage_Lab” from the questionnaire was not available to be included in the dataset.

Abstract

The long-term presence of refugees in Chad and the reduction in funding to provide assistance in recent years have led the humanitarian community to reconsider the approach to assistance of these populations. WFP and UNHCR, the Government's main partners in providing assistance to refugees, had conducted a "socio-economic categorization" in 2014 and 2015 in some refugee camps, and an update was decided for 2017. This update was designed to go beyond a simple categorization and focuses on identifying profiles of refugee households that can be empowered in the short to medium term and the factors that can foster this empowerment. The assessment covers 87,724 refugee households in Chad and was carried out during June-August 2017.

Geographic coverage

Areas hosting refugees in Chad. This includes 19 refugee camps and 9 villages.

Analysis unit

Household and individual

Universe

All refugee households residing in Chad.

UNHCR PPG: 1TCDA, 1TCDB, 1TCDD

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The survey's objective was to deliver representative data of all refugees living in Chad. The total population of refugees at the time of the survey was estimated at slightly below 90,000 households. These refugees were located in 19 refugee camps and 9 villages.

The survey applied a full-coverage (census) approach, i.e. no sample selection was made. The registration database served as the list frame. The total number of completed interviews was 87,724 households.

While the original data collection took a full-coverage approach, the public-release version of the dataset contains a systematically drawn sub-sample of this original data for reasons of statistical disclosure control. The total sample size in the dataset presented for public release is 8,772 households.

Sampling deviation

None.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

All questionaires are provided in section "external ressources".

Cleaning operations

The dataset presented here has undergone light checking, cleaning and restructuring (data may still contain errors) as well as anonymization (includes removal of direct identifiers and sensitive variables, and grouping values of select variables). Moreover, it constitutes a sub-sample of the data originally collected.

Response rate

Information unavailable.

AP VoteCast is a survey of the American electorate conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago for Fox News, NPR, PBS NewsHour, Univision News, USA Today Network, The Wall Street Journal and The Associated Press.

AP VoteCast combines interviews with a random sample of registered voters drawn from state voter files with self-identified registered voters selected using nonprobability approaches. In general elections, it also includes interviews with self-identified registered voters conducted using NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak® panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population.

Interviews are conducted in English and Spanish. Respondents may receive a small monetary incentive for completing the survey. Participants selected as part of the random sample can be contacted by phone and mail and can take the survey by phone or online. Participants selected as part of the nonprobability sample complete the survey online.

In the 2020 general election, the survey of 133,103 interviews with registered voters was conducted between Oct. 26 and Nov. 3, concluding as polls closed on Election Day. AP VoteCast delivered data about the presidential election in all 50 states as well as all Senate and governors’ races in 2020.

Using this Data - IMPORTANT

This is survey data and must be properly weighted during analysis: DO NOT REPORT THIS DATA AS RAW OR AGGREGATE NUMBERS!!

Instead, use statistical software such as R or SPSS to weight the data.

National Survey

The national AP VoteCast survey of voters and nonvoters in 2020 is based on the results of the 50 state-based surveys and a nationally representative survey of 4,141 registered voters conducted between Nov. 1 and Nov. 3 on the probability-based AmeriSpeak panel. It included 41,776 probability interviews completed online and via telephone, and 87,186 nonprobability interviews completed online. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 0.4 percentage points for voters and 0.9 percentage points for nonvoters.

State Surveys

In 20 states in 2020, AP VoteCast is based on roughly 1,000 probability-based interviews conducted online and by phone, and roughly 3,000 nonprobability interviews conducted online. In these states, the margin of sampling error is about plus or minus 2.3 percentage points for voters and 5.5 percentage points for nonvoters.

In an additional 20 states, AP VoteCast is based on roughly 500 probability-based interviews conducted online and by phone, and roughly 2,000 nonprobability interviews conducted online. In these states, the margin of sampling error is about plus or minus 2.9 percentage points for voters and 6.9 percentage points for nonvoters.

In the remaining 10 states, AP VoteCast is based on about 1,000 nonprobability interviews conducted online. In these states, the margin of sampling error is about plus or minus 4.5 percentage points for voters and 11.0 percentage points for nonvoters.

Although there is no statistically agreed upon approach for calculating margins of error for nonprobability samples, these margins of error were estimated using a measure of uncertainty that incorporates the variability associated with the poll estimates, as well as the variability associated with the survey weights as a result of calibration. After calibration, the nonprobability sample yields approximately unbiased estimates.

As with all surveys, AP VoteCast is subject to multiple sources of error, including from sampling, question wording and order, and nonresponse.

Sampling Details

Probability-based Registered Voter Sample

In each of the 40 states in which AP VoteCast included a probability-based sample, NORC obtained a sample of registered voters from Catalist LLC’s registered voter database. This database includes demographic information, as well as addresses and phone numbers for registered voters, allowing potential respondents to be contacted via mail and telephone. The sample is stratified by state, partisanship, and a modeled likelihood to respond to the postcard based on factors such as age, race, gender, voting history, and census block group education. In addition, NORC attempted to match sampled records to a registered voter database maintained by L2, which provided additional phone numbers and demographic information.

Prior to dialing, all probability sample records were mailed a postcard inviting them to complete the survey either online using a unique PIN or via telephone by calling a toll-free number. Postcards were addressed by name to the sampled registered voter if that individual was under age 35; postcards were addressed to “registered voter” in all other cases. Telephone interviews were conducted with the adult that answered the phone following confirmation of registered voter status in the state.

Nonprobability Sample

Nonprobability participants include panelists from Dynata or Lucid, including members of its third-party panels. In addition, some registered voters were selected from the voter file, matched to email addresses by V12, and recruited via an email invitation to the survey. Digital fingerprint software and panel-level ID validation is used to prevent respondents from completing the AP VoteCast survey multiple times.

AmeriSpeak Sample

During the initial recruitment phase of the AmeriSpeak panel, randomly selected U.S. households were sampled with a known, non-zero probability of selection from the NORC National Sample Frame and then contacted by mail, email, telephone and field interviewers (face-to-face). The panel provides sample coverage of approximately 97% of the U.S. household population. Those excluded from the sample include people with P.O. Box-only addresses, some addresses not listed in the U.S. Postal Service Delivery Sequence File and some newly constructed dwellings. Registered voter status was confirmed in field for all sampled panelists.

Weighting Details

AP VoteCast employs a four-step weighting approach that combines the probability sample with the nonprobability sample and refines estimates at a subregional level within each state. In a general election, the 50 state surveys and the AmeriSpeak survey are weighted separately and then combined into a survey representative of voters in all 50 states.

State Surveys

First, weights are constructed separately for the probability sample (when available) and the nonprobability sample for each state survey. These weights are adjusted to population totals to correct for demographic imbalances in age, gender, education and race/ethnicity of the responding sample compared to the population of registered voters in each state. In 2020, the adjustment targets are derived from a combination of data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s November 2018 Current Population Survey Voting and Registration Supplement, Catalist’s voter file and the Census Bureau’s 2018 American Community Survey. Prior to adjusting to population totals, the probability-based registered voter list sample weights are adjusted for differential non-response related to factors such as availability of phone numbers, age, race and partisanship.

Second, all respondents receive a calibration weight. The calibration weight is designed to ensure the nonprobability sample is similar to the probability sample in regard to variables that are predictive of vote choice, such as partisanship or direction of the country, which cannot be fully captured through the prior demographic adjustments. The calibration benchmarks are based on regional level estimates from regression models that incorporate all probability and nonprobability cases nationwide.

Third, all respondents in each state are weighted to improve estimates for substate geographic regions. This weight combines the weighted probability (if available) and nonprobability samples, and then uses a small area model to improve the estimate within subregions of a state.

Fourth, the survey results are weighted to the actual vote count following the completion of the election. This weighting is done in 10–30 subregions within each state.

National Survey

In a general election, the national survey is weighted to combine the 50 state surveys with the nationwide AmeriSpeak survey. Each of the state surveys is weighted as described. The AmeriSpeak survey receives a nonresponse-adjusted weight that is then adjusted to national totals for registered voters that in 2020 were derived from the U.S. Census Bureau’s November 2018 Current Population Survey Voting and Registration Supplement, the Catalist voter file and the Census Bureau’s 2018 American Community Survey. The state surveys are further adjusted to represent their appropriate proportion of the registered voter population for the country and combined with the AmeriSpeak survey. After all votes are counted, the national data file is adjusted to match the national popular vote for president.

Analysis of ‘COVID-19 Cases by Population Characteristics Over Time’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/a3291d85-0076-43c5-a59c-df49480cdc6d on 13 February 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

Note: On January 22, 2022, system updates to improve the timeliness and accuracy of San Francisco COVID-19 cases and deaths data were implemented. You might see some fluctuations in historic data as a result of this change. Due to the changes, starting on January 22, 2022, the number of new cases reported daily will be higher than under the old system as cases that would have taken longer to process will be reported earlier.

A. SUMMARY This dataset shows San Francisco COVID-19 cases by population characteristics and by specimen collection date. Cases are included on the date the positive test was collected.

Population characteristics are subgroups, or demographic cross-sections, like age, race, or gender. The City tracks how cases have been distributed among different subgroups. This information can reveal trends and disparities among groups.

Data is lagged by five days, meaning the most recent specimen collection date included is 5 days prior to today. Tests take time to process and report, so more recent data is less reliable.

B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED Data on the population characteristics of COVID-19 cases and deaths are from: * Case interviews * Laboratories * Medical providers

These multiple streams of data are merged, deduplicated, and undergo data verification processes. This data may not be immediately available for recently reported cases because of the time needed to process tests and validate cases. Daily case totals on previous days may increase or decrease. Learn more.

Data are continually updated to maximize completeness of information and reporting on San Francisco residents with COVID-19.

Data notes on each population characteristic type is listed below.

Race/ethnicity * We include all race/ethnicity categories that are collected for COVID-19 cases. * The population estimates for the "Other" or “Multi-racial” groups should be considered with caution. The Census definition is likely not exactly aligned with how the City collects this data. For that reason, we do not recommend calculating population rates for these groups.

Sexual orientation * Sexual orientation data is collected from individuals who are 18 years old or older. These individuals can choose whether to provide this information during case interviews. Learn more about our data collection guidelines. * The City began asking for this information on April 28, 2020.

Gender * The City collects information on gender identity using these guidelines.

Comorbidities * Underlying conditions are reported when a person has one or more underlying health conditions at the time of diagnosis or death.

Transmission type * Information on transmission of COVID-19 is based on case interviews with individuals who have a confirmed positive test. Individuals are asked if they have been in close contact with a known COVID-19 case. If they answer yes, transmission category is recorded as contact with a known case. If they report no contact with a known case, transmission category is recorded as community transmission. If the case is not interviewed or was not asked the question, they are counted as unknown.

Homelessness Persons are identified as homeless based on several data sources: * self-reported living situation
* the location at the time of testing * Department of Public Health homelessness and health databases * Residents in Single-Room Occupancy hotels are not included in these figures.
These methods serve as an estimate of persons experiencing homelessness. They may not meet other homelessness definitions.

Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) occupancy * A Skilled Nursing

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

These data, intended for use in conjunction with JUVENILE DELINQUENCY AND ADULT CRIME, 1948-1977 [RACINE, WISCONSIN]: THREE BIRTH COHORTS (ICPSR 8163), are organized into two different types: Block data and Home data. Part 1, Block Data, contains the characteristics of each block in Racine for the years 1950, 1960, and 1970 as selected from the United States Census of Housing for each of these years. The data are presented for whole blocks for each year and for blocks agglomerated into equal spaces so that comparison may be made between the 1950, 1960, and 1970 data. In addition, land use and target density (gas stations, grocery and liquor stores, restaurants, and taverns) measures are included. The data were obtained from land use maps and city directories. These block data have been aggregated into census tracts, police grid areas, natural areas, and neighborhoods for the purpose of describing the spatial units of each in comparable fashion for 1950, 1960, and 1970. The information contained within the Block Data file is intended to be used to merge ecological data with any of the files described in the ICPSR 8163 codebook. The Home datasets (Parts 2-6) contain selected variables from the Block Data file merged with the Cohort Police Contact data or the Cohort Interview data from ICPSR 8163. The Home datasets represent the merged files used by the principal investigators for their analysis and are included here only as examples of how the files from ICPSR 8163 may be merged with the Block data.

The 2008 National Survey of Drinking and Driving Attitudes and Behaviors was composed of a single questionnaire administered to a sample of randomly selected individuals 16 and older, with ages 16 through 24 over-sampled. The respondents were asked about their drinking behavior, their drinking and driving behavior, use of designated drivers, their hosting events in which drinking occurred, risks they perceive associated with drinking and driving, experience with anti-DWI enforcement activity, and their attitudes concerning major intervention strategies.The survey was administered from September 10, 2008 to December 22, 2008. A total of 6,999 respondents completed the survey, including 5,392 landline interviews and 1,607 cell phone interviews. The total number of completed interviews for each of the four Census regions (Northeast, Midwest, South, and West) was 1,409, 1,654, 2,390, and 1,546, respectively.

Abstract

The Integrated Survey of Living Standards (ISLS), renamed in 2004 to Integrated Survey of Living Conditions Survey (ILCS) is conducted annually by the NSS National Statistical Service of the Republic of Armenia, formed the basis for monitoring living conditions in Armenia. The ILCS is a universally recognized best-practice survey for collecting data to inform about the living standards of households. The ILCS comprises comprehensive and valuable data on the welfare of households and separate individuals which gives the NSS an opportunity to provide the public with up to date information on the population's income, expenditures, the level of poverty and the other changes in living standards on an annual basis. Since 1996, when the survey was first implemented in Armenia, the National Statistical Service of the Republic of Armenia (NSS) with the assistance of the World Bank, USAID and other donor organizations, has been putting efforts to continuously improve the quality of data collected through household surveys, as well as to advance its own expertise in arriving at a more accurate assessment of poverty. These efforts have proven to be successful as the data collected through household surveys and the estimates of poverty based on such data became an important input in defining and monitoring the poverty reduction strategy, which is the responsibility of the Government.

The ILCS is conducted during the year with monthly rotation of households and settlements. The survey results serve primarily to assess the level of consumption-based poverty in Armenia. In 2004, the NSS implemented significant changes to improve the Integrated Living Conditions Survey and to update the poverty assessment methodology, which was used until 2008. With the technical assistance provided by the World Bank: · the survey sample frame was updated using the 2001 Population Census frame · the sample size was expanded to ensure representativeness of data by regions · the ILCS questionnaire was revised to reflect economic and social changes between 1998/99 and 2003, as well as a comprehensive section on employment was added into the questionnaire · the interviewers underwent a more profound training.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

Households

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

During the 2004-2006 surveys the sampling frame for the ILCS was built using the database of addresses for the 2001 Population Census; the database was developed with the World Bank technical assistance. The database of addresses of all households in Armenia was divided into 48 strata including 12 communities of Yerevan city. The households from other regions (marzes) were grouped according to the following three categories: big towns with 15,000 and more population; villages, and other towns. Big towns formed 16 strata (the only exception was the Vayots Dzor marz where there are no big towns). The villages and other towns formed 10 strata each. According to this division, a random, two-step sample stratified at marz level was developed. All marzes, as well as all urban and rural settlements were included in the sample population according to the share of population residing in those settlements as percent to the total population in the country. In the first step, the settlements, i.e. primary sample units, were selected: 43 towns out of 48 or 90 percent of all towns in Armenia were surveyed during the year; also 216 villages out of 951 or 23 percent of all villages in the country were covered by the survey. In the second step, the respondent households were selected: 6,816 households (5,088 from urban and 1,728 from rural settlements). As a result, for the first time since 1996 survey data were representative at the marz level. In 2004 the survey covered 43 urban and 216 rural areas with the sample size of 6,816 households.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Abstract

The primary objective of the 2017 Indonesia Dmographic and Health Survey (IDHS) is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic demographic and health indicators. The IDHS provides a comprehensive overview of population and maternal and child health issues in Indonesia. More specifically, the IDHS was designed to: - provide data on fertility, family planning, maternal and child health, and awareness of HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) to help program managers, policy makers, and researchers to evaluate and improve existing programs; - measure trends in fertility and contraceptive prevalence rates, and analyze factors that affect such changes, such as residence, education, breastfeeding practices, and knowledge, use, and availability of contraceptive methods; - evaluate the achievement of goals previously set by national health programs, with special focus on maternal and child health; - assess married men’s knowledge of utilization of health services for their family’s health and participation in the health care of their families; - participate in creating an international database to allow cross-country comparisons in the areas of fertility, family planning, and health.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual
• Children age 0-5
• Woman age 15-49
• Man age 15-54

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), all women age 15-49 years resident in the household, and all men age 15-54 years resident in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The 2017 IDHS sample covered 1,970 census blocks in urban and rural areas and was expected to obtain responses from 49,250 households. The sampled households were expected to identify about 59,100 women age 15-49 and 24,625 never-married men age 15-24 eligible for individual interview. Eight households were selected in each selected census block to yield 14,193 married men age 15-54 to be interviewed with the Married Man's Questionnaire. The sample frame of the 2017 IDHS is the Master Sample of Census Blocks from the 2010 Population Census. The frame for the household sample selection is the updated list of ordinary households in the selected census blocks. This list does not include institutional households, such as orphanages, police/military barracks, and prisons, or special households (boarding houses with a minimum of 10 people).

The sampling design of the 2017 IDHS used two-stage stratified sampling: Stage 1: Several census blocks were selected with systematic sampling proportional to size, where size is the number of households listed in the 2010 Population Census. In the implicit stratification, the census blocks were stratified by urban and rural areas and ordered by wealth index category.

Stage 2: In each selected census block, 25 ordinary households were selected with systematic sampling from the updated household listing. Eight households were selected systematically to obtain a sample of married men.

For further details on sample design, see Appendix B of the final report.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The 2017 IDHS used four questionnaires: the Household Questionnaire, Woman’s Questionnaire, Married Man’s Questionnaire, and Never Married Man’s Questionnaire. Because of the change in survey coverage from ever-married women age 15-49 in the 2007 IDHS to all women age 15-49, the Woman’s Questionnaire had questions added for never married women age 15-24. These questions were part of the 2007 Indonesia Young Adult Reproductive Survey Questionnaire. The Household Questionnaire and the Woman’s Questionnaire are largely based on standard DHS phase 7 questionnaires (2015 version). The model questionnaires were adapted for use in Indonesia. Not all questions in the DHS model were included in the IDHS. Response categories were modified to reflect the local situation.

Cleaning operations

All completed questionnaires, along with the control forms, were returned to the BPS central office in Jakarta for data processing. The questionnaires were logged and edited, and all open-ended questions were coded. Responses were entered in the computer twice for verification, and they were corrected for computer-identified errors. Data processing activities were carried out by a team of 34 editors, 112 data entry operators, 33 compare officers, 19 secondary data editors, and 2 data entry supervisors. The questionnaires were entered twice and the entries were compared to detect and correct keying errors. A computer package program called Census and Survey Processing System (CSPro), which was specifically designed to process DHS-type survey data, was used in the processing of the 2017 IDHS.

Response rate

Of the 49,261 eligible households, 48,216 households were found by the interviewer teams. Among these households, 47,963 households were successfully interviewed, a response rate of almost 100%.

In the interviewed households, 50,730 women were identified as eligible for individual interview and, from these, completed interviews were conducted with 49,627 women, yielding a response rate of 98%. From the selected household sample of married men, 10,440 married men were identified as eligible for interview, of which 10,009 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 96%. The lower response rate for men was due to the more frequent and longer absence of men from the household. In general, response rates in rural areas were higher than those in urban areas.

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 result from mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding 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 2017 Indonesia Demographic and Health Survey (2017 IDHS) 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 2017 IDHS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and identical size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling error is a measure of the variability among 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 2017 IDHS sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 2017 IDHS is a STATA program. This program used the Taylor linearization method for 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.

A more detailed description of estimates of sampling errors are presented in Appendix C of the survey final report.

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 year - Reporting of age at death in days - Reporting of age at death in months

See details of the data quality tables in Appendix D of the survey final report.

These data were collected to examine the relationships among crime rates, residents' attitudes, physical deterioration, and neighborhood structure in selected urban Baltimore neighborhoods. The data collection provides both block- and individual-level neighborhood data for two time periods, 1981-1982 and 1994. The block-level files (Parts 1-6) include information about physical conditions, land use, people counts, and crime rates. Parts 1-3, the block assessment files, contain researchers' observations of street layout, traffic, housing type, and general upkeep of the neighborhoods. Part 1, Block Assessments, 1981 and 1994, contains the researchers' observations of sampled blocks in 1981, plus selected variables from Part 3 that correspond to items observed in 1981. Nonsampled blocks (in Part 2) are areas where block assessments were done, but no interviews were conducted. The "people counts" file (Part 4) is an actual count of people seen by the researchers on the sampled blocks in 1994. Variables for this file include the number, gender, and approximate age of the people seen and the types of activities they were engaged in during the assessment. Part 5, Land Use Inventory for Sampled Blocks, 1994, is composed of variables describing the types of buildings in the neighborhood and their physical condition. Part 6, Crime Rates and Census Data for All Baltimore Neighborhoods, 1970-1992, includes crime rates from the Baltimore Police Department for aggravated assault, burglary, homicide, larceny, auto theft, rape, and robbery for 1970-1992, and census information from the 1970, 1980, and 1990 United States Censuses on the composition of the housing units and the age, gender, race, education, employment, and income of residents. The individual-level files (Parts 7-9) contain data from interviews with neighborhood leaders, as well as telephone surveys of residents. Part 7, Interviews with Neighborhood Leaders, 1994, includes assessments of the level of involvement in the community by the organization to which the leader belongs and the types of activities sponsored by the organization. The 1982 and 1994 surveys of residents (Parts 8 and 9) asked respondents about different aspects of their neighborhoods, such as physical appearance, problems, and crime and safety issues, as well as the respondents' level of satisfaction with and involvement in their neighborhoods. Demographic information on respondents, such as household size, length of residence, marital status, income, gender, and race, is also provided in this file.

Abstract

Round 1 of the Afrobarometer survey was conducted from July 1999 through June 2001 in 12 African countries, to solicit public opinion on democracy, governance, markets, and national identity. The full 12 country dataset released was pieced together out of different projects, Round 1 of the Afrobarometer survey,the old Southern African Democracy Barometer, and similar surveys done in West and East Africa.

The 7 country dataset is a subset of the Round 1 survey dataset, and consists of a combined dataset for the 7 Southern African countries surveyed with other African countries in Round 1, 1999-2000 (Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe). It is a useful dataset because, in contrast to the full 12 country Round 1 dataset, all countries in this dataset were surveyed with the identical questionnaire

Geographic coverage

Botswana Lesotho Malawi Namibia South Africa Zambia Zimbabwe

Analysis unit

Basic units of analysis that the study investigates include: individuals and groups

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

A new sample has to be drawn for each round of Afrobarometer surveys. Whereas the standard sample size for Round 3 surveys will be 1200 cases, a larger sample size will be required in societies that are extremely heterogeneous (such as South Africa and Nigeria), where the sample size will be increased to 2400. Other adaptations may be necessary within some countries to account for the varying quality of the census data or the availability of census maps.

The sample is designed as a representative cross-section of all citizens of voting age in a given country. The goal is to give every adult citizen an equal and known chance of selection for interview. We strive to reach this objective by (a) strictly applying random selection methods at every stage of sampling and by (b) applying sampling with probability proportionate to population size wherever possible. A randomly selected sample of 1200 cases allows inferences to national adult populations with a margin of sampling error of no more than plus or minus 2.5 percent with a confidence level of 95 percent. If the sample size is increased to 2400, the confidence interval shrinks to plus or minus 2 percent.

Sample Universe

The sample universe for Afrobarometer surveys includes all citizens of voting age within the country. In other words, we exclude anyone who is not a citizen and anyone who has not attained this age (usually 18 years) on the day of the survey. Also excluded are areas determined to be either inaccessible or not relevant to the study, such as those experiencing armed conflict or natural disasters, as well as national parks and game reserves. As a matter of practice, we have also excluded people living in institutionalized settings, such as students in dormitories and persons in prisons or nursing homes.

What to do about areas experiencing political unrest? On the one hand we want to include them because they are politically important. On the other hand, we want to avoid stretching out the fieldwork over many months while we wait for the situation to settle down. It was agreed at the 2002 Cape Town Planning Workshop that it is difficult to come up with a general rule that will fit all imaginable circumstances. We will therefore make judgments on a case-by-case basis on whether or not to proceed with fieldwork or to exclude or substitute areas of conflict. National Partners are requested to consult Core Partners on any major delays, exclusions or substitutions of this sort.

Sample Design

The sample design is a clustered, stratified, multi-stage, area probability sample.

To repeat the main sampling principle, the objective of the design is to give every sample element (i.e. adult citizen) an equal and known chance of being chosen for inclusion in the sample. We strive to reach this objective by (a) strictly applying random selection methods at every stage of sampling and by (b) applying sampling with probability proportionate to population size wherever possible.

In a series of stages, geographically defined sampling units of decreasing size are selected. To ensure that the sample is representative, the probability of selection at various stages is adjusted as follows:

The sample is stratified by key social characteristics in the population such as sub-national area (e.g. region/province) and residential locality (urban or rural). The area stratification reduces the likelihood that distinctive ethnic or language groups are left out of the sample. And the urban/rural stratification is a means to make sure that these localities are represented in their correct proportions. Wherever possible, and always in the first stage of sampling, random sampling is conducted with probability proportionate to population size (PPPS). The purpose is to guarantee that larger (i.e., more populated) geographical units have a proportionally greater probability of being chosen into the sample. The sampling design has four stages

A first-stage to stratify and randomly select primary sampling units;

A second-stage to randomly select sampling start-points;

A third stage to randomly choose households;

A final-stage involving the random selection of individual respondents

We shall deal with each of these stages in turn.

STAGE ONE: Selection of Primary Sampling Units (PSUs)

The primary sampling units (PSU's) are the smallest, well-defined geographic units for which reliable population data are available. In most countries, these will be Census Enumeration Areas (or EAs). Most national census data and maps are broken down to the EA level. In the text that follows we will use the acronyms PSU and EA interchangeably because, when census data are employed, they refer to the same unit.

We strongly recommend that NIs use official national census data as the sampling frame for Afrobarometer surveys. Where recent or reliable census data are not available, NIs are asked to inform the relevant Core Partner before they substitute any other demographic data. Where the census is out of date, NIs should consult a demographer to obtain the best possible estimates of population growth rates. These should be applied to the outdated census data in order to make projections of population figures for the year of the survey. It is important to bear in mind that population growth rates vary by area (region) and (especially) between rural and urban localities. Therefore, any projected census data should include adjustments to take such variations into account.

Indeed, we urge NIs to establish collegial working relationships within professionals in the national census bureau, not only to obtain the most recent census data, projections, and maps, but to gain access to sampling expertise. NIs may even commission a census statistician to draw the sample to Afrobarometer specifications, provided that provision for this service has been made in the survey budget.

Regardless of who draws the sample, the NIs should thoroughly acquaint themselves with the strengths and weaknesses of the available census data and the availability and quality of EA maps. The country and methodology reports should cite the exact census data used, its known shortcomings, if any, and any projections made from the data. At minimum, the NI must know the size of the population and the urban/rural population divide in each region in order to specify how to distribute population and PSU's in the first stage of sampling. National investigators should obtain this written data before they attempt to stratify the sample.

Once this data is obtained, the sample population (either 1200 or 2400) should be stratified, first by area (region/province) and then by residential locality (urban or rural). In each case, the proportion of the sample in each locality in each region should be the same as its proportion in the national population as indicated by the updated census figures.

Having stratified the sample, it is then possible to determine how many PSU's should be selected for the country as a whole, for each region, and for each urban or rural locality.

The total number of PSU's to be selected for the whole country is determined by calculating the maximum degree of clustering of interviews one can accept in any PSU. Because PSUs (which are usually geographically small EAs) tend to be socially homogenous we do not want to select too many people in any one place. Thus, the Afrobarometer has established a standard of no more than 8 interviews per PSU. For a sample size of 1200, the sample must therefore contain 150 PSUs/EAs (1200 divided by 8). For a sample size of 2400, there must be 300 PSUs/EAs.

These PSUs should then be allocated proportionally to the urban and rural localities within each regional stratum of the sample. Let's take a couple of examples from a country with a sample size of 1200. If the urban locality of Region X in this country constitutes 10 percent of the current national population, then the sample for this stratum should be 15 PSUs (calculated as 10 percent of 150 PSUs). If the rural population of Region Y constitutes 4 percent of the current national population, then the sample for this stratum should be 6 PSU's.

The next step is to select particular PSUs/EAs using random methods. Using the above example of the rural localities in Region Y, let us say that you need to pick 6 sample EAs out of a census list that contains a total of 240 rural EAs in Region Y. But which 6? If the EAs created by the national census bureau are of equal or roughly equal population size, then selection is relatively straightforward. Just number all EAs consecutively, then make six selections using a table of random numbers. This procedure, known as simple random sampling (SRS), will

Abstract

The study included four separate surveys:

1. The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2002

2. The survey of Family Income Support (MOP in Serbian) recipients in 2002 These two datasets are published together separately from the 2003 datasets.

3. The LSMS survey of general population of Serbia in 2003 (panel survey)

4. The survey of Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 These two datasets are published together.

Objectives

LSMS represents multi-topical study of household living standard and is based on international experience in designing and conducting this type of research. The basic survey was carried out in 2002 on a representative sample of households in Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija). Its goal was to establish a poverty profile according to the comprehensive data on welfare of households and to identify vulnerable groups. Also its aim was to assess the targeting of safety net programs by collecting detailed information from individuals on participation in specific government social programs. This study was used as the basic document in developing Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) in Serbia which was adopted by the Government of the Republic of Serbia in October 2003.

The survey was repeated in 2003 on a panel sample (the households which participated in 2002 survey were re-interviewed).

Analysis of the take-up and profile of the population in 2003 was the first step towards formulating the system of monitoring in the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS). The survey was conducted in accordance with the same methodological principles used in 2002 survey, with necessary changes referring only to the content of certain modules and the reduction in sample size. The aim of the repeated survey was to obtain panel data to enable monitoring of the change in the living standard within a period of one year, thus indicating whether there had been a decrease or increase in poverty in Serbia in the course of 2003. [Note: Panel data are the data obtained on the sample of households which participated in the both surveys. These data made possible tracking of living standard of the same persons in the period of one year.]

Along with these two comprehensive surveys, conducted on national and regional representative samples which were to give a picture of the general population, there were also two surveys with particular emphasis on vulnerable groups. In 2002, it was the survey of living standard of Family Income Support recipients with an aim to validate this state supported program of social welfare. In 2003 the survey of Roma from Roma settlements was conducted. Since all present experiences indicated that this was one of the most vulnerable groups on the territory of Serbia and Montenegro, but with no ample research of poverty of Roma population made, the aim of the survey was to compare poverty of this group with poverty of basic population and to establish which categories of Roma population were at the greatest risk of poverty in 2003. However, it is necessary to stress that the LSMS of the Roma population comprised potentially most imperilled Roma, while the Roma integrated in the main population were not included in this study.

Geographic coverage

The surveys were conducted on the whole territory of Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sample frame for both surveys of general population (LSMS) in 2002 and 2003 consisted of all permanent residents of Serbia, without the population of Kosovo and Metohija, according to definition of permanently resident population contained in UN Recommendations for Population Censuses, which were applied in 2002 Census of Population in the Republic of Serbia. Therefore, permanent residents were all persons living in the territory Serbia longer than one year, with the exception of diplomatic and consular staff.

The sample frame for the survey of Family Income Support recipients included all current recipients of this program on the territory of Serbia based on the official list of recipients given by Ministry of Social affairs.

The definition of the Roma population from Roma settlements was faced with obstacles since precise data on the total number of Roma population in Serbia are not available. According to the last population Census from 2002 there were 108,000 Roma citizens, but the data from the Census are thought to significantly underestimate the total number of the Roma population. However, since no other more precise data were available, this number was taken as the basis for estimate on Roma population from Roma settlements. According to the 2002 Census, settlements with at least 7% of the total population who declared itself as belonging to Roma nationality were selected. A total of 83% or 90,000 self-declared Roma lived in the settlements that were defined in this way and this number was taken as the sample frame for Roma from Roma settlements.

Planned sample: In 2002 the planned size of the sample of general population included 6.500 households. The sample was both nationally and regionally representative (representative on each individual stratum). In 2003 the planned panel sample size was 3.000 households. In order to preserve the representative quality of the sample, we kept every other census block unit of the large sample realized in 2002. This way we kept the identical allocation by strata. In selected census block unit, the same households were interviewed as in the basic survey in 2002. The planned sample of Family Income Support recipients in 2002 and Roma from Roma settlements in 2003 was 500 households for each group.

Sample type: In both national surveys the implemented sample was a two-stage stratified sample. Units of the first stage were enumeration districts, and units of the second stage were the households. In the basic 2002 survey, enumeration districts were selected with probability proportional to number of households, so that the enumeration districts with bigger number of households have a higher probability of selection. In the repeated survey in 2003, first-stage units (census block units) were selected from the basic sample obtained in 2002 by including only even numbered census block units. In practice this meant that every second census block unit from the previous survey was included in the sample. In each selected enumeration district the same households interviewed in the previous round were included and interviewed. On finishing the survey in 2003 the cases were merged both on the level of households and members.

Stratification: Municipalities are stratified into the following six territorial strata: Vojvodina, Belgrade, Western Serbia, Central Serbia (Šumadija and Pomoravlje), Eastern Serbia and South-east Serbia. Primary units of selection are further stratified into enumeration districts which belong to urban type of settlements and enumeration districts which belong to rural type of settlement.

The sample of Family Income Support recipients represented the cases chosen randomly from the official list of recipients provided by Ministry of Social Affairs. The sample of Roma from Roma settlements was, as in the national survey, a two-staged stratified sample, but the units in the first stage were settlements where Roma population was represented in the percentage over 7%, and the units of the second stage were Roma households. Settlements are stratified in three territorial strata: Vojvodina, Beograd and Central Serbia.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

In all surveys the same questionnaire with minimal changes was used. It included different modules, topically separate areas which had an aim of perceiving the living standard of households from different angles. Topic areas were the following: 1. Roster with demography. 2. Housing conditions and durables module with information on the age of durables owned by a household with a special block focused on collecting information on energy billing, payments, and usage. 3. Diary of food expenditures (weekly), including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 4. Questionnaire of main expenditure-based recall periods sufficient to enable construction of annual consumption at the household level, including home production, gifts and transfers in kind. 5. Agricultural production for all households which cultivate 10+ acres of land or who breed cattle. 6. Participation and social transfers module with detailed breakdown by programs 7. Labour Market module in line with a simplified version of the Labour Force Survey (LFS), with special additional questions to capture various informal sector activities, and providing information on earnings 8. Health with a focus on utilization of services and expenditures (including informal payments) 9. Education module, which incorporated pre-school, compulsory primary education, secondary education and university education. 10. Special income block, focusing on sources of income not covered in other parts (with a focus on remittances).

Response rate

During field work, interviewers kept a precise diary of interviews, recording both successful and unsuccessful visits. Particular attention was paid to reasons why some households were not interviewed. Separate marks were given for households which were not interviewed due to refusal and for cases when a given household could not be found on the territory of the chosen census block.

In 2002 a total of 7,491 households were contacted. Of this number a total of 6,386 households in 621 census rounds were interviewed. Interviewers did not manage to collect the data for 1,106 or 14.8% of selected households. Out of this number 634 households