Chart and table of population level and growth rate for the Mombasa, Kenya metro area from 1950 to 2025.

This dataset shows the Mombasa population pyramid by Age group as reported by the Kenya National Bureau of statistics during the 2009 National census

As of 2043, Nairobi was the most populated city in Kenya, with more than 2.7 million people living in the capital. The city is also the only one in the country with a population exceeding one million. For instance, Mombasa, the second most populated, has nearly 800 thousand inhabitants. As of 2020, Kenya's population was estimated at over 53.7 million people.

Mombasa Pop Pyramid Age Groups - 2009

Kenya had a Muslim population of roughly 5.6 million people, according to the last country census conducted in 2019. Nearly 50 percent of individuals adhering to Islam lived in the Northern-East counties of Mandera (856.5 thousand people), Garissa (815.8 thousand people), and Wajir (767.3 thousand people). Overall, around 10 percent of Kenya's population identified as Muslim.

Population 2020 Mombasa, Ken
This dataset falls under the category Traffic Generating Parameters Population.
It contains the following data: This resource contains the 'Estimated total number of people per grid-cell 2020 ' cropped at Mombasa, Kenya scale for COVID-19 Contagion Risk Hotspots Estimation.
This dataset was scouted on 2022-02-13 as part of a data sourcing project conducted by TUMI. License information might be outdated: Check original source for current licensing. The data can be accessed using the following URL / API Endpoint: https://contagionhotspots.org/nl/dataset/mms/resource/4757d7ec-831d-49df-be94-f88f8ef70092See URL for data access and license information.

Abstract

The survey of the Pemba was an attempt to reach all households in Kenya with links to Pemba in Tanzania. It was conducted in the two counties of Kilifi and Kwale on the coast, north and south of Mombasa, respectively. According to information from village elders familiar with the Pemba community in Kenya, most of the Pemba population resides in these two counties. While there are some Pemba residents in Lamu, the security situation prevented data collection there. Further, a few Pemba are believed to live in the city of Mombasa and elsewhere in the country. But due to lack of further information, no data were collected in Mombasa or elsewhere.

The objectives of the full survey, conducted in August 2016, were: 1. To establish the number and characteristics of the Pemba living in Kenya, including their arrival period in Kenya, nationality and their problems; 2. To make recommendations for the issuance of the documentation that is required for those who apply for citizenshiop by registration

Geographic coverage

Kwale and Kilifi counties, Kenya.

Analysis unit

Households, individuals

Universe

The total number of households with links to Pemba in Tanzania, in Kilifi and Kwale counties.

Kind of data

Census/enumeration data [cen]

Sampling procedure

A household mapping exercise was conducted in Kilifi and Kwale to identify Pemba households and to make it easier to locate them on the ground. The mapping was done from 4 to 12 August 2016 by a team from UNHCR Kenya office and KNBS.

The mapping in each village commenced with a visit to the chief's office, who put the team in touch with the village chair. The team explained the purpose of its visit to the village chair and began the mapping exercise. The importance of involving the chiefs and village chairpersons is that they are well connected, recognised and trusted by residents in their communities. The same procedure is followed by KNBS when they are mapping for sample surveys and censuses.

The team established physical boundaries of the area to be mapped, located the boundaries on the map and then identified and listed the Pemba households within the enumeration boundary. A Pemba household, in this context, is one identified by the informants as having at least one person with origins or links to Pemba. The links may include a person's spouse, parents or grandparents, who migrated to Kenya from Pemba or where a person has migrated from Pemba to Kenya.

The mapping team was followed by the village chair to the Pemba households, where the UNHCR and Haki Centre staff listed number of persons in each, while the KNBS staff marked the location of the household on the map. The entrances of identified Pemba households were marked in chalk with the letters HCR and a number starting at 001 to make it easier to find the houses during the enumeration. Since it seems to be generally well known where the Pemba live it was not considered stigmatising to mark their doors. During the feedback forums with the Pemba after the survey, there was no mention of stigmatization due to marking the door with chalk.

The maps were from the 2009 national housing and population census, purchased from KNBS. The team made lists with information about the location, number and size of each household. The mapping team visited 17 villages in Kilifi and Kwale (see Table 1 in Section 2.7). All villages visited were identified before the mapping exercise by key informants as locations being home to the Pemba of Kenya. The key informants were Pemba elders in different sub-counties previously identified for providing background information on the Pemba arrival and history in Kenya. In each sub-country, the chief, the assistant chief or the village chair also accompanied the team. In Kwale, 358 households were identified with 2,220 persons, and in Kilifi, 86 households with 558 persons.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The questionnaire was developed before the pilot survey and revised during and after the pilot survey, based on the experience gained. The pilot survey was used to test the questions and to check for inconsistences and misinterpretations due to unclear concepts and definitions. The testing process also revealed some important themes that had been left out.

The structure of the questionnaire was altered, including the order of the questions and the introductory pages, to facilitate administration of the questionnaire.

Finally, the questionnaire was translated into Swahili. Both the English and Swahili versions were used in the survey, even though the English version was preferred by almost all interviewers. The two versions of the questionnaire are attached in Annex 4 and 5. Enumerators used the English questionnaire to frame the questions in the local and less academic version of Swahili.

Cleaning operations

The data were imported into a Statistics Analysis Software (SAS) file and validated. Several errors were identified during the validation process, both on how the data had been recorded by the interviewers in the field and how the data had been entered by the clerks. There were particularly many errors in the entry of the variable “Relation to the household head” (Q.2). There were also many errors in the entry of the age of the household head, which was mostly due to errors in recording the right codes. A substantial amount of time was spent cleaning the data after the data had been entered, which included consulting many paper questionnaires. The quality of the survey data was significantly improved after the data entry revision. The data were analysed using both SAS software and Excel spreadsheets.

Response rate

The rate of non-response was low. Of the 452 households visited, visits to only 23 households can be categorised as non-response. A lot of effort was made to revisit non-responding households, using interviewers living nearby. Out of the 23 non-responsive households, 12 were not at home or there was no adult at home. There were 2 interrupted interviews, 7 refusals and 2 with no links to Pemba. In one household the respondent was not mentally stable enough to be interviewed, according to the enumerator.

Abstract

The 2022 Kenya Demographic and Health Survey (2022 KDHS) was implemented by the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) in collaboration with the Ministry of Health (MoH) and other stakeholders. The survey is the 7th KDHS implemented in the country.

The primary objective of the 2022 KDHS is to provide up-to-date estimates of basic sociodemographic, nutrition and health indicators. Specifically, the 2022 KDHS collected information on: • Fertility levels and contraceptive prevalence • Childhood mortality • Maternal and child health • Early Childhood Development Index (ECDI) • Anthropometric measures for children, women, and men • Children’s nutrition • Woman’s dietary diversity • Knowledge and behaviour related to the transmission of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases • Noncommunicable diseases and other health issues • Extent and pattern of gender-based violence • Female genital mutilation.

The information collected in the 2022 KDHS will assist policymakers and programme managers in monitoring, evaluating, and designing programmes and strategies for improving the health of Kenya’s population. The 2022 KDHS also provides indicators relevant to monitoring the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for Kenya, as well as indicators relevant for monitoring national and subnational development agendas such as the Kenya Vision 2030, Medium Term Plans (MTPs), and County Integrated Development Plans (CIDPs).

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 aged 15-49, men ageed 15-54, and all children aged 0-4 resident in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample for the 2022 KDHS was drawn from the Kenya Household Master Sample Frame (K-HMSF). This is the frame that KNBS currently uses to conduct household-based sample surveys in Kenya. The frame is based on the 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census (KPHC) data, in which a total of 129,067 enumeration areas (EAs) were developed. Of these EAs, 10,000 were selected with probability proportional to size to create the K-HMSF. The 10,000 EAs were randomised into four equal subsamples. A survey can utilise a subsample or a combination of subsamples based on the sample size requirements. The 2022 KDHS sample was drawn from subsample one of the K-HMSF. The EAs were developed into clusters through a process of household listing and geo-referencing. The Constitution of Kenya 2010 established a devolved system of government in which Kenya is divided into 47 counties. To design the frame, each of the 47 counties in Kenya was stratified into rural and urban strata, which resulted in 92 strata since Nairobi City and Mombasa counties are purely urban.

The 2022 KDHS was designed to provide estimates at the national level, for rural and urban areas separately, and, for some indicators, at the county level. The sample size was computed at 42,300 households, with 25 households selected per cluster, which resulted in 1,692 clusters spread across the country, 1,026 clusters in rural areas, and 666 in urban areas. The sample was allocated to the different sampling strata using power allocation to enable comparability of county estimates.

The 2022 KDHS employed a two-stage stratified sample design where in the first stage, 1,692 clusters were selected from the K-HMSF using the Equal Probability Selection Method (EPSEM). The clusters were selected independently in each sampling stratum. Household listing was carried out in all the selected clusters, and the resulting list of households served as a sampling frame for the second stage of selection, where 25 households were selected from each cluster. However, after the household listing procedure, it was found that some clusters had fewer than 25 households; therefore, all households from these clusters were selected into the sample. This resulted in 42,022 households being sampled for the 2022 KDHS. Interviews were conducted only in the pre-selected households and clusters; no replacement of the preselected units was allowed during the survey data collection stages.

For further details on sample design, see APPENDIX A of the survey report.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

Four questionnaires were used in the 2022 KDHS: Household Questionnaire, Woman’s Questionnaire, Man’s Questionnaire, and the Biomarker Questionnaire. The questionnaires, based on The DHS Program’s model questionnaires, were adapted to reflect the population and health issues relevant to Kenya. In addition, a self-administered Fieldworker Questionnaire was used to collect information about the survey’s fieldworkers.

Cleaning operations

CAPI was used during data collection. The devices used for CAPI were Android-based computer tablets programmed with a mobile version of CSPro. The CSPro software was developed jointly by the U.S. Census Bureau, Serpro S.A., and The DHS Program. Programming of questionnaires into the Android application was done by ICF, while configuration of tablets was completed by KNBS in collaboration with ICF. All fieldwork personnel were assigned usernames, and devices were password protected to ensure the integrity of the data.

Work was assigned by supervisors and shared via Bluetooth® to interviewers’ tablets. After completion, assigned work was shared with supervisors, who conducted initial data consistency checks and edits and then submitted data to the central servers hosted at KNBS via SyncCloud. Data were downloaded from the central servers and checked against the inventory of expected returns to account for all data collected in the field. SyncCloud was also used to generate field check tables to monitor progress and identify any errors, which were communicated back to the field teams for correction.

Secondary editing was done by members of the KNBS and ICF central office team, who resolved any errors that were not corrected by field teams during data collection. A CSPro batch editing tool was used for cleaning and tabulation during data analysis.

Response rate

A total of 42,022 households were selected for the survey, of which 38,731 (92%) were found to be occupied. Among the occupied households, 37,911 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 98%. The response rates for urban and rural households were 96% and 99%, respectively. In the interviewed households, 33,879 women age 15-49 were identified as eligible for individual interviews. Of these, 32,156 women were interviewed, yielding a response rate of 95%. The response rates among women selected for the full and short questionnaires were similar (95%). In the households selected for the men’s survey, 16,552 men age 15-54 were identified as eligible for individual interviews and 14,453 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 87%.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: (1) non-sampling errors, and (2) sampling errors. Non-sampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2022 Kenya Demographic and Health Survey (2022 KDHS) to minimise this type of error, non-sampling 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 2022 KDHS 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 errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

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

If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2022 KDHS sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 2022 KDHS is a SAS program. This program used the Taylor linearisation method for variance estimation for survey estimates that are means, proportions or ratios. 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 B of the survey report.

Data

Abstract

Kenya hosts over half a million refugees, who, along with their hosts in urban and camp areas, face difficult living conditions and limited socioeconomic opportunities. Most refugees in Kenya live in camps located in the impoverished counties of Turkana (40 percent) and Garissa (44 percent), while 16 percent inhabit urban areas—mainly in Nairobi but also in Mombasa and Nakuru.

Refugees in Kenya are not systematically included in national surveys, creating a lack of comparable socioeconomic data on camp-based and urban refugees, and their hosts. As the third of a series of surveys focusing on closing this gap, this Socioeconomic Survey of Urban Refugees's aim is to understand the socioeconomic needs of urban refugees in Kenya, especially in the face of ongoing conflicts, environmental hazards, and others shocks, as well as the recent government announcement to close Kenya’s refugee camps, which highlights the potential move of refugees from camps into urban settings.

The SESs are representative of urban refugees and camp-based refugees in Turkana County. For the Kalobeyei 2018 and Urban 2020–21 SESs, households were randomly selected from the UNHCR registration database (proGres), while a complete list of dwellings, obtained from UNHCR’s dwelling mapping exercise, was used to draw the sample for the Kakuma 2019 SES. The Kalobeyei SES and Kakuma SES were done via Computer-Assisted Personal Interviews (CAPI). Due to COVID-19 social distancing measures, the Urban SES was collected via Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI). The Kalobeyei SES covers 6,004 households; the Kakuma SES covers 2,127 households; and the Urban SES covers 2,438 households in Nairobi, Nakuru, and Mombasa.

Questionnaires are aligned with national household survey instruments, while additional modules are added to explore refugee-specific dynamics. The SES includes modules on demographics, household characteristics, assets, employment, education, consumption, and expenditure, which are aligned with the Kenya Integrated Household Budget Survey (KIHBS) 2015–16 and the recent Kenya Continuous Household Survey (KCHS) 2019.

Additional modules on access to services, vulnerabilities, social cohesion, mechanisms for coping with lack of food, displacement trajectories, and durable solutions are administered to capture refugee-specific challenges.

Geographic coverage

Nairobi, Mombasa, Nakuru

Analysis unit

Households and individuals

Universe

All refugees registered with UNHCR via ProGres, verified via the Verification Exercise conducted in 2021

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The survey was conducted using the UNHCR proGres data as the sampling frame. Due to the COVID-19 lockdown, the survey data was collected via telephone. Hence, the survey is representative of households with active phone numbers registered by UNHCR in urban Kenya – Nairobi, Mombasa and Nakuru. A sample size of 2,500 was needed to ensure a margin of error of less than 5 percent at a confidence level of 95 percent for groups represented by at least 50 percent of the population.

The sample for the urban SES is designed to estimate socioeconomic indicators, such as food insecurity, for groups whose share represents at least 50 percent of the population. Considering the total urban refugee population as of August 2020 and the proportions of main countries of origin, as well as a 10 percent nonresponse rate, the target sample size is 2,500 households in total, with 1,250 in Nairobi, 700 in Nakuru, and 550 in Mombasa. A total of 2,438 households were reached: 1,300 in Nairobi, 409 in Nakuru, and 729 in Mombasa.

The units in ProGres list are UNHCR proGres families, which are different from households as defined in standard household surveys. Upon registration, UNHCR groups individuals into ‘proGres’ families which do not necessarily meet the criteria to be considered a household. A proGres family is usually comprised by no more than one household. In turn, a household can be integrated by one or more proGres families.

Households were selected as the unit of observation to ensure comparability with national household surveys. Households are a set of related or unrelated people (either sharing the same dwelling or not) who pool ration cards and regularly cook and eat together. As proGres families were sampled, the identification of households was done by an introductory section that confirms that each member of the selected proGres family is a member of the household and whether there are other members in the households that belong to other ProGres families. Thus, the introductory section documents the number of proGres families present in the household under observation.

Before selecting the survey strata, the team attempted to better understand the type of bias observed by focusing on refugees with access to phones. From the proGres data, phone penetration in urban areas is high (Nairobi and Mombasa: 93 percent, Nakuru: 95 percent). To understand the type of bias observed by focusing on refugees with access to phone, we looked at socio-economic outcomes for proGres family refugees with access to a phone number and those without

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]

35,1 (per 1000 population) in 1999.

Abstract

African Population and Health Research Center (APHRC) had from 2005 to 2010, conducted a longitudinal survey in two formal settlements (Harambee and Jericho) and two informal (slum) settlements (Korogocho and Viwandani) in Nairobi to understand the uptake and patterns of school enrolment after the introduction of the Free Primary Education (FPE) in Kenya. The results of the study showed increased utilization of private informal schools among slum households as compared to the formal settlements.

That is, by 2010, almost two thirds of pupils in the slum settlements were enrolled in private informal schools while in Harambee and Jericho, more than three quarters of the pupils were enrolled in government primary schools with the remaining portion attending high-end private schools.

In 2012, ERP conducted a cross-sectional survey across six major urban centers to investigate, within the context of FPE, if the pattern of school enrolment observed in Korogocho and Viwandani slums could also be observed in other urban slums in Kenya. Below are some key facts from this study. Data is manly disaggregated by school type - government schools (FPE schools), and non-government schools, specifically the formal private schools and low-cost schools.

The study tried to answer four broad questions: What is the impact of free primary education (FPE) on schooling patterns among poor households in urban slums in Kenya? What are the qualitative and quantitative explanations of the observed patterns? Is there a difference in achievement measured by performance in a standardized test on literacy and numeracy administered to pupils in government schools under FPE and non-government schools?

Geographic coverage

Kenya - in six urban slums of Nairobi spread across 6 towns - Nairobi, Mombasa, Nyeri, Eldoret, Nakuru and Kisumu. In total 5854 households and 230 schools were covered.

Analysis unit

A cross-sectional survey focusing on households with individuals aged between 5 and 19, as well as schools and pupils in grades 3 and 6. Data therefore exits at household, individuals, schools and student levels.

Universe

This is a cross sectional study that was conducted in seven slum sites spread across six towns namely Nairobi, Mombasa, Kisumu, Eldoret, Nakuru and Nyeri and targetted hoseholds with individuals aged between 5 and 19 years and schools located within the study site or within a 1KM radius. For the schools to be included in the study they had to have both grade 3 and 6, which were target grades for this study.

Sampling procedure

This was a cross-sectional study involving schools and households. The study covered six purposively selected major towns (Eldoret, Kisumu, Mombasa, Nairobi, Nakuru and Nyeri) in different parts of Kenya (see Map 1) to provide case studies that could lead to a broader understanding of what is happening in urban informal settlements. The selection of a town was informed by presence of informal settlements and its administrative importance, that is, provincial headquarter or regional business hub. A three-stage cluster sampling procedure was used to select households in all towns with an exception of Nairobi. At the first stage, major informal settlement locations were identified in each of the six towns. The informal settlement sites were identified based on enumeration areas (EAs) designated as slums in the 2009 National Population and Housing Census conducted by the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS). After identifying all slum EAs in each of the study towns, the location with the highest number of EAs designated as slum settlements was selected for the study. At the second stage of sampling, 20% of EAs within each major slum location were randomly selected. However, in Nakuru we randomly selected 67% (10) EAs while in Nyeri all available 9 EAs were included in the sample. This is because these two towns had fewer EAs and therefore the need to oversample to have a representative number of EAs. In total, 101 EAs were sampled from the major slum locations across the five towns. At the third stage, all households in the sampled EAs were listed using the 2009 census' EA maps prepared by KNBS. During the listing, 10,388 households were listed in all sampled EAs. Excluding Nairobi, 4,042 (57%) households which met the criteria of having at least one school-going child aged 5-20 years were selected for the survey. In Nairobi, 50% of all households which had at least one school-going child aged between 5 and 20 years were randomly sampled from all EAs existing in APHRC schooling data collected in 2010. A total of 3,060 households which met the criteria were selected. The need to select a large sample of households in Nairobi was to enable us link data from the current study with previous ones that covered over 6000 households in Korogocho and Viwandani. By so doing, we were able to get a representative sample of households in Nairobi to continue observing the schooling patterns longitudinally. In all, there were 7,102 eligible households in all six towns. A total of 14,084 individuals within the target age bracket living in 5,854 (82% of all eligible households) participated in the study. The remaining 18% of eligible households were not available for the interview as most of them had either left the study areas, declined the interview, or lacked credible respondents in the household at the time of the data collection visit or call back.

For the school-based survey, schools in each town were listed and classified into three groups based on their location: (i) within the selected slum location; (ii) within the catchment area of the selected slum area - about 1 km radius from the border of the study locations; and (iii) away from a selected slum. In Nairobi, schools were selected from existing APHRC data. During the listing exercise, lists of schools were also obtained from Municipality/City Education Departments in selected towns. The lists were used to counter-check the information obtained during listing. All schools located within the selected slum areas and those situated within the catchment area (1 km radius from the border of the slum) were included in the sample as long as they had a grade 6 class or intended to have one in 2012. The selection of schools within an informal settlement and those located within 1 km radius was because they were more likely to be accessed by children from the target informal settlement. Two hundred and forty-five (245) schools met the selection criteria and were included in the sample. Two hundred and thirty (230) primary schools (89 government schools, 94 formal private, and 47 low-cost schools) eventually participated in the survey. A total of 7,711 grade 3, 7,319 grade 6 pupils and 671 teachers of the same grades were reached and interviewed. All 230 head teachers (or their deputies) were interviewed on school characteristics.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]; Focus groups; Assessment; Filming (classroom observation).

Research instrument

Five survey questionnaires were administered at household level:

(i). An individual schooling history questionnaire was administered to individuals aged 5 - 20. The questionnaire was directly administered to individuals aged 12 - 20 and administered to a proxy for children younger than 12 years. Ideally, the proxy was the child's parent or guardian, or an adult familiar with the individual's schooling history and who usually resides in the same household. The questionnaire had two main sections: school participation for the current year (year of interview), and school participation for the five years preceding the year of interview (i.e. 2007 to 2011). The section on schooling participation on the current year collected information on the schooling status of the individual, the type, name and location of the school that the individual was attending, grade, and whether the individual had changed schools or dropped out of school in the current year. Respondents also provided information on the reasons for changing schools and dropping out of school, where applicable. The section on school participation for previous years also collected similar information. The questionnaire also collected information on the individual's year of birth and when they joined grade one.

(ii). A household schedule questionnaire was administered to the household head or the spouse. It sought information on the members of the household, their relationship to the household head, their gender, age, education and parental survivorship.

(iii). A parental/guardian perception questionnaire was administered to the household head or the parent/guardian of the child. It collected information on the parents/guardians' perceptions on Free Primary Education since its implementation, household support to school where child(ren) attends and household schooling decision.

(iv). A parental/guardian involvement questionnaire was strictly administered to a parent or guardian who usually lives in the household and who was equipped with adequate knowledge of the individual's schooling information (i.e. credible respondent). The questionnaire was completed for each individual of the targeted age bracket (5-20 years). The information on the child comprised questions on the gender of the child, parental/guardian aspirations for the child's educational attainment, and parental beliefs about the child's ability in school and their chances of achieving the aspired level.

(v). A household amenities and livelihood questionnaire was administered to the household head or the spouse or a member of the household who could give reliable information. The questionnaire collected information on duration of stay in the

Abstract

This research of registered businesses with one to four employees was conducted in Kenya between April 2013 and January 2014, at the same time with Kenya Enterprise Survey 2013. Data from 360 establishments was analyzed. Stratified random sampling was used to select the surveyed businesses. The objective of the survey was to obtain feedback from enterprises on the state of the private sector and constraints to its growth.

Micro-Enterprise Survey topics include firm characteristics, gender participation, access to finance, annual sales, costs of inputs/labor, workforce composition, bribery, licensing, infrastructure, trade, crime, competition, capacity utilization, land and permits, taxation, informality, business-government relations, innovation and technology, and performance measures. Over 90 percent of the questions objectively ascertain characteristics of a country's business environment. The remaining questions assess the survey respondents' opinions on what are the obstacles to firm growth and performance.

Geographic coverage

Central, Nyanza, Mombasa, Nairobi, and Nakuru regions

Analysis unit

The primary sampling unit of the study is an establishment. An establishment is a physical location where business is carried out and where industrial operations take place or services are provided. A firm may be composed of one or more establishments. For example, a brewery may have several bottling plants and several establishments for distribution. For the purposes of this survey an establishment must make its own financial decisions and have its own financial statements separate from those of the firm. An establishment must also have its own management and control over its payroll.

Universe

The whole population, or the universe, covered in the Enterprise Surveys is the non-agricultural private economy. It comprises: all manufacturing sectors according to the ISIC Revision 3.1 group classification (group D), construction sector (group F), services sector (groups G and H), and transport, storage, and communications sector (group I). Note that this population definition excludes the following sectors: financial intermediation (group J), real estate and renting activities (group K, except sub-sector 72, IT, which was added to the population under study), and all public or utilities sectors. Companies with 100% government ownership are not eligible to participate in the Enterprise Surveys.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sample for Ethiopia was selected using stratified random sampling. Two levels of stratification were used: firm sector and geographic region.

For industry stratification, the universe was divided into four manufacturing industries (food, textiles and garments, chemicals and plastics, other manufacturing) and two service sectors (retail and other services).

Regional stratification was defined in five regions: Central, Nyanza, Mombasa, Nairobi, and Nakuru.

2012 Census of Business Establishments of the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics was used as a sample frame for the survey of micro firms.

The enumerated establishments with less than five employees (micro establishments) were used as sample frame for the Kenya micro survey with the aim of obtaining interviews at 360 establishments.

The quality of the frame was assessed at the onset of the project through visits to a random subset of firms and local contractor knowledge. The sample frame was not immune from the typical problems found in establishment surveys: positive rates of non-eligibility, repetition, non-existent units, etc. In addition, the sample frame contains no telephone/fax numbers so the local contractor had to screen the contacts by visiting them.

Given the impact that non-eligible units included in the sample universe may have on the results, adjustments may be needed when computing the appropriate weights for individual observations. The percentage of confirmed non-eligible units as a proportion of the total number of sampled establishments contacted for the survey was 5.2% (39 out of 756) for micro firms.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The following survey instruments are available: - Manufacturing Module Questionnaire - Services Module Questionnaire

The survey is fielded via manufacturing or services questionnaires in order not to ask questions that are irrelevant to specific types of firms, e.g. a question that relates to production and nonproduction workers should not be asked of a retail firm. In addition to questions that are asked across countries, all surveys are customized and contain country-specific questions. An example of customization would be including tourism-related questions that are asked in certain countries when tourism is an existing or potential sector of economic growth.

There is a skip pattern in the Service Module Questionnaire for questions that apply only to retail firms.

Cleaning operations

Data entry and quality controls are implemented by the contractor and data is delivered to the World Bank in batches (typically 10%, 50% and 100%). These data deliveries are checked for logical consistency, out of range values, skip patterns, and duplicate entries. Problems are flagged by the World Bank and corrected by the implementing contractor through data checks, callbacks, and revisiting establishments.

Response rate

Survey non-response must be differentiated from item non-response. The former refers to refusals to participate in the survey altogether whereas the latter refers to the refusals to answer some specific questions. Enterprise Surveys suffer from both problems and different strategies were used to address these issues.

Item non-response was addressed by two strategies: a- For sensitive questions that may generate negative reactions from the respondent, such as corruption or tax evasion, enumerators were instructed to collect "Refusal to respond" (-8) as a different option from "Don't know" (-9). b- Establishments with incomplete information were re-contacted in order to complete this information, whenever necessary.

Survey non-response was addressed by maximizing efforts to contact establishments that were initially selected for interview. Attempts were made to contact the establishment for interview at different times, days of the week before a replacement establishment (with similar strata characteristics) was suggested for interview. Survey non-response did occur but substitutions were made in order to potentially achieve strata-specific goals.

12,3 (per 1000 population) in 1999.

Abstract

The main objective of this survey is to help improve the impact of migration and remittances on the economic and social situation in Kenya. At present, our knowledge base on migration and remittances in Kenya is quite limited. By providing rich and detailed information on the impact of migration and remittances at the household level, this survey will greatly increase our ability to maximize the socio-economic impact of migration and remittances in Kenya. To these ends, the survey will collect nationally-representative information in various African countries on three types of households: non-migrant households, internal migrant households and international migrant households. Comparisons between these three types of households will help policymakers identify the socio-economic impact of migration and remittances in Kenya.

Geographic coverage

Embu, Garissa, Kakamega, Kiambu, Kilifi, Kisii, Lugari, Machakos, Malindi, Migori, Mombasa, Nairobi, Nakuru, Siaya, Thika, Vihiga, Rachuonyo

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual

Universe

17 out of 69 districts in Kenya were selected using procedures described in the methodology report

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The study used the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) National Sample Survey and Evaluation Programme (NASSEP IV) sampling frame which has 69 districts as stratum comprising both urban and rural areas. The sample design for the study was multi-stage with the first stage covering the primary sampling units (PSUs) which was a sample of clusters developed during the 1999 census. The second stage was selection of households within the clusters. A re-listing of all households in sampled clusters was carried out to up-date the 1999 and also to be able to classify households into the three strata of interest in this study: international migrant households, internal migrant households, and non-migrant households. At the household level, interviews were held with the household head/spouse or other responsible adult with the requisite information about the household. The study uses a purposive survey methodology that first selected districts with the largest concentration of international migrants, and then selected clusters also with the highest concentration of international migrants. This was done based on the information of previous household surveys and the knowledge of the administrative officers, statistical officers and cluster guides.

Sampling Frame At the time of the study, the available National Census was conducted in 1999. This census did not contain questions on remittances but had questions on migration. The migration question asked then was where family members were living in the last one year. This means that the census captured either those who had come back or those who had come visiting and were to return to where they migrated to. It did not distinguish clearly the migration component. Further, the census was conducted 10 years ago which meant it does not provide the current status on aspects of migration. The Kenya Integrated Household Budget Survey (KIHBS) 2005/06 and the Financial Services Deepening survey (FSD) are two surveys that have recently been conducted with an element of migration and remittances. However, the information is not adequate for the current survey. For example, the KIHBS has a question that captures issues of remittance linking them to the transfers received from abroad. Although it has about 13,000 households, only about 125 households indicated they had received such transfers. This was a very small sample compared to what was envisaged by the current study. The Financial Services Deepening survey (FSD) (2006/07) also has a question on cash transfers from abroad but all this is related to issues of access to financial services and not to issues sought in the current study. Thus, it could not be used for the current study. The KIHBS and FSD surveys was based on the KNBS NASSEP IV and although one may have thought of revisiting the households that were covered for additional information, it is against the KNBS regulations to conduct such follow-ups and the households identities are not provided. The Kenya National Bureau of Statistics household survey sampling frame, the National Sample Survey and Evaluation Programme (NASSEP IV), is based on the 1999 population and housing census. The objective of NASSEP IV frame was to construct a national master sampling frame of clusters of households in both rural and urban areas in Kenya using a sound sampling design. This sampling frame has a total of 1,800 clusters of which 1,260 are rural and 540 are urban as indicated in Appendix Table 1. Each cluster holds about 80 to 100 households. The framework is based on the old administrative units comprising of 69 districts in 8 Provinces. Currently, the districts have been subdivided and increased to 265 but this does not distort our sampling frame based on NASSEP IV as the new districts are curved out of the old districts.

The Sample This study utilized the NASSEP IV frame to select 102 clusters (5.6% of the total clusters) in 19 districts which yielded a total sample of 2,448 households assuming an average of 24 households in each cluster. The districts were selected first, then the clusters in each district and finally the households in each cluster. Households in each cluster were re-listed (updated) and grouped into three strata--international migrant, internal migrant and non-migrant households. In the selection of clusters in each district, at least one of the targeted five clusters was urban with exception of Nairobi and Mombasa which are purely urban. The study however ended up covering 92 clusters (5.1% of the total clusters in NASSEP IV) from 17 districts. Two targeted districts-Kajiado and Baringo- were not covered due to logistical problems. First of all, the team was expected to finalize the field by 15th December so that the analysis could begin and be on time. When the fieldwork was winding up on 22nd December, the two districts were yet to be covered. Two, the two districts have more transport challenges and the team was therefore expected to use KNBS transport facilities and more research assistants to capture the households which are more widely spread on the ground. This required adequate funding and by the time the fieldwork was winding up no funds had been received from World Bank. Third, even when the funds were received in January, the team considered that the study would be capturing households in a different consumption cycle, having just gone through the festive season. Given all these factors, this saw a total of 2,123 household covered out of 2, 208 (96% of the total targeted). Of these, some households were later dropped due to a lot of missing data especially due to non response, and at the end a total of 1,942 households were cleaned up for analysis. This including 953 are urban and 989 rural drawn from 51 rural and 40 urban clusters. Selection of Districts There was a particular interest in investigating households that had international migrants and which may have received transfers from abroad. A random sample of the population would not produce adequate number of households that had received transfers or had international migration, as we learnt from the KIHBS data set. As indicated earlier, out of 13,000 households surveyed under KIHBS only 125 households receiving remittances from abroad. With this experience and information, this study selected the top nineteen districts from KIHBS (2005/07) that showed households with migration characteristics. The key factor used was that the households indicated they received cash transfers from abroad. Districts with more than one household fulfilling this criterion of having received transfers from abroad were considered. In addition, Financial Services Deepening survey (FSD) survey results were used to confirm that the selected districts had reported having received money from abroad. In addition, since this is a relatively rare phenomenon in Kenya, the selection of districts is designed such that households with the relevant characteristics have a high probability of being selected. As such those districts with a presence of cash transfers mechanisms such as M-PESA, Western Union, or Money Gram services were considered. All these information was used to update the information from KIHBS.

Selection of Clusters In each district, 5 clusters were selected of which at least one cluster was an urban cluster as defined by KNBS, except for Nairobi and Mombasa which are purely urban. Some other district had more than one urban cluster selected based on their number of clusters and accessibility to rural clusters for example Garissa. The study covered 10 clusters in Nairobi and 6 in Mombasa with an attempt made to capture this across various income group levels.
In selection of the clusters, the supervisors sat down with the KNBS statistics officers, cluster guides, village elders, administrative officers (Chiefs and sub-chiefs) to map out clusters where the probability of getting an international migrant was high. Of this probabilities were very subjective as it was based on how well these people understood the composition of the households in the areas they represent. This helped to identify the five clusters targeted for study.

Selection of Households The selection process involved re-listing of the households in each cluster so as to update the list of occupied households and identify the three groups of households. Each group or stratum was treated as an independent sub-frame and random sampling was used to select households in each group. The listing exercise was

Abstract

National Health Accounts (NHA) is an internationally recognised method used to track expenditures in a health system for a specified period of time. Specifically, NHA details the flow of funding from financial sources (e.g., donors, Ministry of Finance), to financing agents (i.e., those who manage the funds, such as the Ministry of Health [MoH] or nongovernmental organisations [NGOs]), to providers (e.g., public and private facilities) and finally to end users (e.g., inpatient and outpatient care, pharmaceuticals).

Actual expenditures, rather than budget inputs, are used to fill a series of tables that show the flow of funding through the health sector. NHA also provides detailed breakdowns of disease-specific expenditures such as those for HIV/AIDS and reproductive health (RH). NHA is designed to be used as a policy tool to facilitate the implementation of health system goals. This report describes findings from the third round of NHA in Kenya.

The first two estimations covered financial years (FYs) 1994/95 and 2001/02, respectively. This third round, undertaken in 2007 and covering 2005/06 was implemented by the MoH and Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) with financial support from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). USAID’s Health Systems 20/20 Project, led by Abt Associates Inc., provided technical support. The findings will be used as a platform for informing policy decisions concerning resource allocation and will also be used by stakeholders in the sector.

Geographic coverage

The whole country

Analysis unit

households and institutions

Universe

Household health expenditure covered all households in the country whereas the institutional surveys covered firms selected under the review.

Kind of data

Administrative records data [adm]

Sampling procedure

Kenya is divided into eight administrative provinces. The provinces are in turn subdivided into 70 districts. Each district is subdivided into divisions while the divisions are split into locations and finally each location into sublocations.

During the 1999 population census, each sublocation was subdivided into smaller units called enumeration areas (EAs). Kenya has about 62,000 EAs. The EAs provided census information on households and population. This information was used in the design of the National Sample Survey Evaluation Programme (NASSEP) IV master sample with 1,800 selected EAs.

The cartographic records for each EA in the master sample were updated in the field, one year preceding the NHA survey. The 1,800 clusters were distributed into 540 urban and 1,260 rural clusters.

The province provided a natural stratification of the population. The six major urban centres Nairobi, Mombasa, Kisumu, Nakuru, Eldoret, and Thika were further substratified into five socioeconomic classes based on incomes to circumvent the extensive socioeconomic diversity inherent in them as follows: upper, lower upper, middle, lower middle and lower; this improved the precision of estimates due to reduced sampling variation.

It was estimated that 8,844 households would be sufficient to provide estimates both at provincial and national levels as well as disaggregation to urban and rural components of the country. This sample was to yield 6,060 interviews in the rural and 2,784 in the urban clusters (Table 2.2). This was to be achieved through coverage of 737 clusters (505 rural and 232 urban clusters).

Twelve households were to be covered in each cluster. The method of proportional allocation was used in assigning the sample households to the provinces and districts. The count of the households was transformed to the square root of the census households to avoid under-representing the smaller districts.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Cleaning operations

To expedite data entry and monitor data quality, all completed questionnaires were sent to a data management unit at the MoH Planning Department, which was the designated secretariat for the activity.

This approach helped in standardizing and speeding up data entry and reducing errors. Questionnaires were also checked for completeness before entry.

Data were entered in a Census and Survey Processing System (CSPro) by a team of data entry clerks under the supervision of data entry supervisors. The data were reentered for validation. The data files were then converted into SPSS, the software used for data analysis. Much of the analysis was replicated using Stata, to confirm that weighted estimates were correct. Stata was also used to perform analysis that could not be undertaken using SPSS.

Response rate

A total of 8,844 households were selected for the survey. Of these, 8,453 were successfully interviewed, giving a response rate of 95.6 percent, and the survey reported observations on 38,235 individuals living in these households.

Abstract

In an effort to address the ICT data challenges, the Communications Commission of Kenya (CCK) partnered with Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) to undertake a comprehensive National ICT Survey. This was planned and executed during the months of May and June 2010.

The main objective of the study was to collect, collate and analyse data relating to ICT access and usage by various categorizations in Kenya. The survey captured data and information on critical ICT indicators as defined by international bodies such as the International Telecommunications Union (ITU). These indicators focused on household and individuals; and the data was be disaggregated by age, gender, administrative regions, rural and urban locations.

The specific objectives of the study were to; Obtain social economic information with a view of understanding usage patterns of ICT services; (a) Obtain social economic information with a view of understanding usage patterns of ICT services; (b) Collect, collate and analyze ICT statistics in line with ICT indicators; (c) Evaluate the factors that will have the greatest impact in ensuring access and usage of ICTs and; (d) Develop a database on access and usage of ICT in Kenya

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

District, Household, Individual

Universe

Households from the sampled areas.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The National Sample Survey and Evaluation Programme (NASSEP IV) maintained by the Bureau was used as the sampling frame. The frame has 1,800 clusters spread all over the country, and covers all socio-economic classes and hence able to get a suitable and representative sample of the population. The survey was distributed into four domains, namely: 1. National, 2. Major Urban areas, 3. Other Urban areas, and 4. Rural areas.

The major urban towns included Nairobi, Thika, Mombasa, Kisumu, Nakuru and Eldoret. All other areas defined as urban by KNBS but fall outside the major municipalities above were categorized as 'other urban areas'. The rural domain was further sub-divided into their respective provinces, excluding Nairobi which is purely urban. For the 'rural' component, the districts that display identical socio-cultural and economic conditions have been pooled together to create strata from which a representative set of districts is selected to represent the group of such districts. A total of 42 such stratifications were done and one district in each categorization was selected. The major urban areas of the country namely Nairobi, Mombasa, Kisumu, Nakuru, Eldoret and Thika were all sub-stratified into five sub-strata based on perceived levels of income into the: 1. Upper income 2. Lower Upper 3. Middle 4. Lower Middle and 5. Lower.

In this survey, all the six 'major urban' are included while just a few of the 'other urban areas' are selected depending on their population (household) distribution.

Selection of the Clusters for the Survey The selection of the sample clusters was done systematically using the Equal Probability Selection method (EPSEM). Since NASSEP IV was developed using Probability Proportional to Size (PPS) method, the resulting sample retains its properties. The selection was done independently within the districts and the urban /rural sub-stratum.

Selection of the Households From each selected cluster, an equal number of 15 households were selected systematically, with a random start. The systematic sampling method was adopted as it enables the distribution of the sample across the cluster evenly and yields good estimates for the population parameters. Selection of the households was done at the office and assigned to the Research Assistants, with strictly no allowance for replacement of non-responding households.

Sampling deviation

Owing to the some logistical challenges the following clusters were partially or not covered at all: • One cluster in Tana River due to floods. • Two clusters in Molo where households shifted to safer areas after the Post Election Violence (PEV). As a result, fewer than the expected households were covered. • One cluster in Koibatek was covered halfway due to relocation of households to pave way for a large plantation.

Where there was no school found within the cluster, Research Assistant was allowed to sample an institution from a neighbouring cluster. In some districts, the schools were found to be very far from the cluster and therefore could not be covered. Where a cluster was to be covered over a weekend, it was often not possible to find a responsible person in institutions to respond to the questionnaire.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Household questionnaire: This will be used to collect background information pertaining to the members of the household and businesses operated by household members. It will collect information about each person in the household such as name, sex, age, education, and relationship to household head etcetera. This information is vital for calculating certain socio-demographic characteristics of the household. The Business module in the household questionnaire will be used to collect information pertaining to usage of ICT in businesses identified in the household. To estimate the magnitude, levels and distribution of ICT usage in the country, all the selected respondents 15 years and above will be subjected to business questionnaire.

Institutional Questionnaire: This will collect information pertaining to institutions providing ICT related programmes in the country. This information will be analyzed to identify gaps and other issues of concern, which need to be addressed in the promotion ICT provision in the country.

Cleaning operations

As a matter of procedure initial manual editing was done in the field by the RAs. The supervisors further checked the questionnaires and validated the data in the field by randomly sampling 20 per cent of the filled questionnaires. After the questionnaires were received from the field, an office editing team was constituted to do office editing.

Data was captured using Census and Survey Processing System (CSPRO) version 4.0 through a data entry screen specially created with checks to ensure accuracy during data entry. All questionnaires were double entered to ensure data quality. Erroneous entries and potential outliers were then verified and corrected appropriately. A total of 20 data entry personnel were engaged during the exercise.

The captured data were exported to Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) for cleaning and analysis. The cleaned data was weighted before final analysis. The weighting of the data involved application of inflation factors derived from the selection probabilities of the EAs and households detailed in section 2.2.7, on weighting the Sample Data.

Response rate

The overall response rate stood at 85.9 per cent. Nairobi had the lowest response rate at 69.4 per cent while the highest (94.6 per cent) was realized in North Eastern. More than 95.5 per cent of all the sampled households were occupied out of which 85.9 per cent were interviewed.

BACKGROUND HIV continues to be a public health concern in Kenya. Out of an estimated 40 million people the national HIV prevalence among adults aged 15-64 years was 7% as of 2007 representing an estimated 1.4 million people living with HIV (Republic of Kenya 2009). According to the Kenya AIDS Indicator Survey (KAIS) and Demographic Health Surveys (DHS), significant differences in HIV prevalence occur throughout the population and geographic locations. Women are at a greater risk (8.4%) than men (5.4%), and there is a greater than 15-fold variation in HIV prevalence among provinces, ranging from 1% in North Eastern province to 15.3% in Nyanza province (KNBS and ICF Macro 2010; National AIDS Control Council [NACC] 2009a; Republic of Kenya 2009). Despite wider provision of HIV testing services, and a high level of knowledge about HIV testing (95% of adults and 88% of youth know where to get an HIV test) (KDHS 2008-9), only 72% of adult Kenyans report having ever tested for HIV and received their results (KAIS, 2012). STUDY RATIONALE Oral HIV self-testing presents an opportunity to increase testing coverage by addressing barriers to HIV testing in VCT and facility based testing (i.e. limited access to VCT centers and hours of testing, HIV-related stigma and discrimination). Population Services International, Kenya (PSI) was awarded by the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) and the National AIDS and STI Control Programme (NASCOP) to conduct a formative study on potential HIV oral self-test kit users, and messaging for HIV oral self-test kits. The purpose of this study was to identify willingness to use oral self-test kits, and factors associated with the potential adoption and use of oral HIV self-testing kits to inform future HIV self-testing pilot progr ams. The objectives are to determine likely users of oral HIV self-test kits, incentives to use a self-test kit, and identify key messages and approaches that could increase demand for the kits. The evidence from this study will inform the design and implementation of oral HIV self-testing pilot projects throughout Kenya; and national policy regarding the availability, cost/subsidies, quality control and procurement. METHODOLOGY This mixed-method study was conducted between November and December 2013 in two provinces/counties of Siaya (rural) and Mombasa (urban). The study population included 782 sexually active men and women aged 18 to 49 from the general population (GP); 100 men who have sex with men (MSM), and 100 female sex workers (FSW).

Abstract

The 2020 Kenya Malaria Indicator Survey (2020 KMIS) was a cross-sectional household-based survey with a nationally representative sample of conventional households. The survey targeted women age 15-49 and children age 6 months to age 14 living within conventional households in Kenya. All women age 15-49 who were usual members of the selected households or who spent the night before the survey in the selected households were eligible for individual interviews. In all sampled households, children age 6 months to age 14 were tested for anaemia and malaria.

The sample for the 2020 KMIS was designed to produce reliable estimates for key malaria indicators at the national level, for urban and rural areas separately, and for each of the five malaria endemic zones.

The 2020 KMIS was designed to provide information on the implementation of core malaria control interventions and serve as a follow-up to the previous malaria indicator surveys. The specific objectives of the 2020 KMIS were as follows: - To measure the extent of ownership of, access to, and use of mosquito nets - To assess coverage of intermittent preventive treatment of malaria during pregnancy - To examine fever management among children under age 5 - To measure the prevalence of malaria and anaemia among children age 6 months to age 14 - To assess knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding malaria control - To determine the Plasmodium species most prevalent in Kenya

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

• Household
• Individual
• Children age 0-14
• Woman age 15-49

Universe

The survey covered all de jure household members (usual residents), women age 15-49 years and children age 0-14 years resident in the household.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The 2020 KMIS followed a two-stage stratified cluster sample design and was intended to provide estimates of key malaria indicators for the country as a whole, for urban and rural areas, and for the five malaria-endemic zones (Highland epidemic prone, Lake endemic, Coast endemic, Seasonal, and Low risk).

The five malaria-endemic zones fully cover the country, and each of the 47 counties in the country falls into one or two of the five zones as follows: 1. Highland epidemic prone: Kisii, Nyamira, West Pokot, Trans-Nzoia, Uasin Gishu, Nandi, Narok, Kericho, Bomet, Bungoma, Kakamega, and Elgeyo Marakwet 2. Lake endemic: Siaya, Kisumu, Migori, Homa Bay, Kakamega, Vihiga, Bungoma, and Busia 3. Coast endemic: Mombasa, Kwale, Kilifi, Lamu, and Taita Taveta 4. Seasonal: Tana River, Marsabit, Isiolo, Meru, Tharaka-Nithi, Embu, Kitui, Garissa, Wajir, Mandera, Turkana, Samburu, Baringo, Elgeyo Marakwet, Kajiado, and West Pokot 5. Low risk: Nairobi, Nyandarua, Nyeri, Kirinyaga, Murang’a, Kiambu, Machakos, Makueni, Laikipia, Nakuru, Meru, Tharaka-Nithi, and Embu.

The survey utilised the fifth National Sample Survey and Evaluation Programme (NASSEP V) household master sample frame, the same frame used for the 2015 KMIS. The frame was used by KNBS from 2012 to 2020 to conduct household-based sample surveys in Kenya. It was based on the 2009 Kenya Population and Housing Census, and the primary sampling units were clusters developed from enumeration areas (EAs). EAs are the smallest geographical areas created for purposes of census enumeration; a cluster can be an EA or part of an EA. The frame had a total of 5,360 clusters and was stratified into urban and rural areas within each of 47 counties, resulting into 92 sampling strata with Nairobi and Mombasa counties being wholly urban.

The survey employed a two-stage stratified cluster sampling design in which, in the first stage of selection, 301 clusters (134 urban and 167 rural) were randomly selected from the NASSEP V master sample frame using an equal probability selection method with independent selection in each sampling stratum. The second stage involved random selection of a fixed number of 30 households per cluster from a roster of households in the sampled clusters using systematic random sampling.

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

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

Four types of questionnaires were used for the 2020 KMIS: the Household Questionnaire, the Woman’s Questionnaire, the Biomarker Questionnaire, and the Fieldworker Questionnaire. The questionnaires were adapted to reflect issues relevant to Kenya. Modifications were determined after a series of meetings with various stakeholders from DNMP and other government ministries and agencies, nongovernmental organisations, and international partners. The Household and Woman’s Questionnaires in English and Kiswahili were programmed into Android tablets, which enabled the use of computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) for data collection. The Biomarker Questionnaire, in English and Kiswahili, was filled out on hard copy and then entered into the CAPI system.

Cleaning operations

The 2020 KMIS questionnaires were programmed using Census and Survey Processing (CSPro) software. The program was then uploaded into Android-based tablets that were used to collect data via CAPI. The CAPI applications, including the supporting applications and the applications for the Household, Biomarker, and Woman’s Questionnaires, were programmed by ICF. The field supervisors transferred data daily to the CSWeb server, developed by the U.S. Census Bureau and located in Nairobi, for data processing on the central office computer at the KNBS office in Nairobi.

Data received from the field teams were registered and checked for any inconsistencies and outliers on the central office computer at KNBS. Data editing and cleaning included an extensive range of structural and internal consistency checks. All anomalies were communicated to field teams, which resolved data discrepancies. The corrected results were maintained in the central office computer at KNBS head office. The central office held data files which was used to produce final report tables and final data sets. CSPro software was used for data editing, cleaning, weighting, and tabulation.

Response rate

A total of 8,845 households were selected for the survey, of which 8,185 were occupied at the time of fieldwork. Among the occupied households, 7,952 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 97%. In the interviewed households, 7,035 eligible women were identified for individual interviews and 6,771 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 96%.

Sampling error estimates

The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: non-sampling errors and sampling errors. Non-sampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2020 Kenya Malaria Indicator Survey (KMIS) to minimise this type of error, non-sampling 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 2020 KMIS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.

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% 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 2020 KMIS sample is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex formulas. Sampling errors are computed in SAS, using programs developed by ICF. These programs use the Taylor linearisation method of variance estimation for survey estimates that are means, proportions, or ratios.

Data appraisal

Data Quality Tables - Household age distribution - Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women - Completeness of reporting - Births by calendar years - Number of enumeration areas completed, by month and malaria endemicity - Positive rapid diagnostic test (RDT) results, by month and malaria endemicity - Concordance and discordance between RDT and microscopy results - Concordance and discordance between national and external quality control laboratories

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