The phone survey was conducted to gather data on the socio-economic impact of COVID-19 crisis in Vanuatu. Community transmission of COVID-19 in Vanuatu started only in March 2022 followed by the nation-wide lockdown and other restrictions. Round 1 HFPS survey was a timely process to observe the effect of the crisis on the country. Round 1 interviewed 2,515 households both in urban and rural regions of the country from July 2022 to September 2022.

Survey topics included employment and income, food security, coping strategies, access to health services, and asset ownership - all on household level. Additionally, two individual-level datasets explore adult employment and child education. The former selects a randomly chosen adult in the household - could be the respondent of a household-level data, head of the household or another individual - and inquires about their employment status. For the latter, the respondent is being asked about education of a randomly chosen child in the household with more than one child.

While these findings are not without their caveats due to the lack of baseline data, constraints of the mobile phone survey methodology, and data quality constraints, they represent the best estimates to date and supplement other data on macroeconomic conditions, exports, firm-level information, etc. to develop an initial picture of the impacts of the crises on the population.

Version 01: Cleaned, labelled and anonymized version of the Master file

-HOUSEHOLD DATASET: Basic Information, Vaccine, Health, Education, Food Insecurity, Employment, Income, Coping Strategies, Assets
-ADULT EMPLOYMENT DATASET: Basic Information, Employment
-CHILD EDUCATION DATASET: Basic Information, Child Education

• Collection start: 2022
• Collection end: 2022

Abstract

The phone survey was conducted to gather data on the socio-economic impact of COVID-19 crisis in Vanuatu. Community transmission of COVID-19 in Vanuatu started only in March 2022 followed by the nation-wide lockdown and other restrictions. Round 1 HFPS survey was a timely process to observe the effect of the crisis on the country. Round 1 interviewed 2,515 households both in urban and rural regions of the country from July 2022 to September 2022.

Survey topics included employment and income, food security, coping strategies, access to health services, and asset ownership - all on household level. Additionally, two individual-level datasets explore adult employment and child education. The former selects a randomly chosen adult in the household - could be the respondent of a household-level data, head of the household or another individual - and inquires about their employment status. For the latter, the respondent is being asked about education of a randomly chosen child in the household with more than one child.

While these findings are not without their caveats due to the lack of baseline data, constraints of the mobile phone survey methodology, and data quality constraints, they represent the best estimates to date and supplement other data on macroeconomic conditions, exports, firm-level information, etc. to develop an initial picture of the impacts of the crises on the population.

Geographic coverage

National urban and rural (6 provinces) coverage: Sanma, Shefa, Torba, Penama, Malampa, Tafea

Analysis unit

Household and Individual.

Universe

All respondents must be aged 18 and over and have a phone.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Vanuatu HFPS Round 1 sample was generated in three ways. The first method is Random Digit Dialing (RDD) process covering all cell telephone numbers active at the time of the sample selection. Majority of the sample was generated through RDD in this round - approximately 84%.

The RDD methodology generates virtually all possible telephone numbers in the country under the national telephone numbering plan and then draws a random sample of numbers. This method guarantees full coverage of the population with a phone.

First, a large first-phase sample of cell phone numbers was selected and screened through an automated process to identify the active numbers. Then, a smaller second-phase sample was selected from the active residential numbers identified in the first-phase sample and was delivered to the data collection team to be called by the interviewers. When a cell phone was called, the call answerer was interviewed as long as he or she was 18 years of age or above and knowledgeable about the household activities.

The remaining 16% of Round 1 respondents was retrieved from Vanuatu's National Sustainable Development Plan (NSDP) Baseline Survey 2019/20.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]

Research instrument

The questionnaire was developed in both English and Bislama. Sections of the Questionnaire are listed below: 1. Interview Information 2. Basic Information 3. Vaccine Information 4. Health 5. Education 6. Food Insecurity 7. Employment 8. Income 9. Coping Strategies 10. Assets 11. Digital 12. Recontact

The questionnaire is provided in this documentation as an external resource.

Cleaning operations

At the end of data collection, the raw dataset was cleaned by the survey firm and the World Bank team. Data cleaning mainly included formatting, relabeling, and excluding survey monitoring variables (e.g., interview start and end times). Data was edited using the software Stata.

Response rate

Total of 9,674 calls were attempted for Round 1. Response rate - where the phone was picked up - was 40%. Out of these, 66% completed the full survey.

Over 150,000 sexual offences were recorded by police in year ending March 2020 (ONS, 2020), and there are indications that the Covid-19 lockdown increased some sexual offences (e.g. online -facilitated abuse, or sexual abuse perpetrated by family members) and decreased others (e.g. assaults by strangers/peers). However, there has been no research into the specific effects of Covid-19 on criminal justice system (CJS) policies and practices relating to sexual offences, nor on the journeys of survivors through the CJS during this period. Prior to the pandemic, there were significant challenges for the investigation and prosecution of sexual offences and conviction rates were extremely low. Some of these challenges may well have been exacerbated by Covid-19 and lockdown e.g. further delays to investigating cases, postponement of Achieving Best Evidence interviews. At the same time, however, Covid-19 has generated significant innovation within the CJS, e.g. the introduction of a video platform within the courts enabling all parties in a criminal hearing to engage securely and remotely, and this may sow the seeds for improvement in survivors’ journeys through the CJS. Drawing on the perspectives and experiences of CJS stakeholders, including complainants and families, police, Crown Prosecution Service, HM Courts and Tribunals Services, the Judiciary, Sexual Assault Referral Centres (SARCs), and Independent Sexual Violence Advisors, this project provide unique insights into the impact of the pandemic on the CJS in sexual offence cases. The data shared here is based on 72 interviews conducted with survivors/family members, and professionals from the police, SARCs and the third sector. The findings identify how the pandemic has exacerbated existing challenges, posed new difficulties, and provoked innovations that could improve the experiences of victims and survivors of sexual violence and abuse.Over 150,000 sexual offences were recorded by the police in the year ending March 2020 (ONS, 2020), and there are indications that lockdown increased some sexual offences (e.g. online-facilitated abuse, sexual abuse perpetrated by family members) and decreased others (e.g. assaults by strangers/peers). However, there has been no research into the specific effects of Covid-19 on criminal justice system (CJS) policies and practices relating to sexual offences, nor on the journeys of survivors through the CJS during this period. Prior to the pandemic, there were significant challenges for the investigation and prosecution of sexual offences and conviction rates were extremely low. Some of these challenges may well have been exacerbated by Covid-19 and lockdown e.g. further delays to investigating cases, postponement of Achieving Best Evidence interviews. At the same time, however, Covid-19 has generated significant innovation within the CJS e.g. the introduction of a video platform within the courts enabling all parties in a criminal hearing to engage securely and remotely, and this may sow the seeds for improvement in survivors' journeys through the CJS. Drawing on the perspectives and experiences of CJS stakeholders, including complainants and families, police, Crown Prosecution Service, HM Courts and Tribunals Services, the Judiciary, Sexual Assault Referral Centres, and Independent Sexual Violence Advisors, this research will provide unique insights into the impact of the pandemic on the CJS in sexual offence cases. Changes to procedures precipitated by Covid-19 might offer longer-term benefits for survivors and stakeholders and we aim to identify these and promote their implementation. We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with survivors and their families, as well as with practitioners representing key Criminal Justice System stakeholder groups from a range of geographical locations across England and Wales between May 2021 and May 2022. We focused on their experiences since the first lockdown came into force on the 23rd March 2020, and captured the evolution in practices that occurred, including during the winter lockdowns. Individuals were approached through a range of avenues, including via our partners and advisory group members, existing links with survivor and professional organisations and networks, and social media.

This trial outlines a unique time limited opportunity to conduct the first ever randomised controlled trial in the UK, to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of randomising participants to Settled Accommodation (SA) or Temporary Accommodation (TA) with the aim of preventing COVID-19 infection and reducing housing instability. The study’s primary objectives were to assess the following: 1. The feasibility of recruiting local authorities and eligible participants to the study. 2. Recruitment rates of participants and retention through 3 months and 6 months post randomisation follow-up data collection. 3. The acceptability of the study and its processes, including randomisation, to single homeless households and local authorities and their willingness to participate in a definitive trial. In addition, the study also aims to assess the following Secondary objectives: 1. Adherence to the study allocation, reach and fidelity (i.e. whether SA is delivered as intended, works as hypothesized, is scalable and sustainable). 2. The feasibility and acceptability of proposed outcome measures for a definitive trial, including resource use and health-related quality of life data, as methods to measure effectiveness of the intervention and to conduct an embedded health economic evaluation within a definitive RCT. 3. The feasibility and acceptability of linkage to routinely collected data within a definitive RCT by assessing whether (a) participants are willing to consent for their data to be linked and (b) personal identifiers can be linked to NHS Digital routine datasets. Quantitative data was collected at baseline and follow-up at 3 and 6 months. 50 participants were invited to complete outcome measures. These participants completed the questionnaire over the telephone with trained members of staff based at the University. Data was entered into Qualtrics application system and used to collect consent and questionnaire response data. The trial explored past and current experiences of homeless individuals in relation to a range of life domains, including; housing, health, adverse life experiences such as imprisonment, and substance misuse. Participants were also invited to take part in qualitative interviews to discuss the acceptability of the study and its processes, including randomisation, and their willingness to participate in a definitive trial. They were also asked about their experience of services and provision. Data from 14 participants and 1 researcher in the Moving On Study was gathered.As part of the government's response to COVID-19, 15,000 rough sleepers have now been offered self-contained temporary accommodation in England, mainly in hotels. This approach, which has involved the decanting of hostels, shelters and similar shared provision for rough sleepers, is a short-term response. When the lockdown ends, decisions will need to be taken about how to house former rough sleepers in line with the UK government's commitment to prevent people from going back to the streets - including, potentially, through the re-opening of shelter-type accommodation. Existing temporary accommodation with shared facilities might make it impossible for people to comply with government social distancing advice. So these decisions will impact on the risk of a second wave of infection from COVID-19 and possibly any mutations. This proposal outlines a unique time limited opportunity to conduct the first ever randomised controlled trial in the UK, to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of permanent housing on the risk of COVID-19 infection and housing stability for people experiencing homelessness. That many homeless people are currently waiting to be housed means they can be randomly allocated to different housing solutions at scale quickly. The insights drawn from the short-term impacts of permanent housing can be used to inform other local authorities' responses to the challenges of COVID-19 and the cost-effectiveness of accommodation alternatives more broadly. 50 participants were recruited through two Local Authorities. Eligibility to participate will be limited to rough sleepers and in single-person households, aged 18 and over. Participants provided informed consent and were enrolled in the trial for at least 6 months, from baseline up to and including the 6 month follow up. All baseline and follow up data collection were completed remotely via telephone interview. Qualitative interviews with 14 participants who consented to speak to the research team were conducted over the telephone. Interviews focussed on their experience of taking part in the trial. One of the Moving On researchers also took part in an interview to describe their experiences of trial procedures.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. In 2016 the Centre for Time Use Research developed an online Click and Drag Diary Instrument (CaDDI), collecting population-representative (quota sample) time use diary data from Dynata’s large international market research panel across 9 countries. We fielded the same instrument using the UK panel across the COVID-19 pandemic: in May-June 2020 during the first lockdown; in late August 2020 following the relaxation of social restrictions; in November 2020 during the second lockdown; in January 2021 during the third lockdown; and in August/September 2021 after the lifting of restrictions.Each survey wave collected between 1-3 time use diaries per respondent, recording activities, location, co-presence, device use, and enjoyment across continuous 10-minute episodes throughout the diary day. The accompanying individual screening questionnaire included information on the standard socio-demographic variables, and a diary day questionnaire containing additional health and diary day related questions was added during wave 2. Overall, 6896 diaries were collected across the 6 waves, allowing analysis of behavioural change between a baseline (in 2016), three national lockdowns, and two intervening periods of the relaxation of social restrictions.The deposited data forms part of wider CTUR projects of ESRC-funded time use research - New Frontiers for Time Use Research, and Time Use Research for National Statistics. Information on time spent in the various activities of daily life provides a comprehensive and exhaustive basis for summarising the activities of a society, yet people in general do not know with any accuracy how much time they devote to their daily activities. For this reason, rather than asking a set of survey questions, such as "how much time did you spend last week in X activity", the time use diary instead asks people to record, in sequence, all their activities through the 24-hour day, with their start and end times. Further information both on these projects and the COVID-19 sequence data collection can be found on the CTUR website.Latest edition informationFor the fourth edition (May 2022), the data and documentation files were replaced with updated versions. Amendments include the replacement of questionnaires with final versions; changes to variable ordering in the questionnaires, dataset and codebook; and updated information on the GHQ questions. See the Summary of Changes document for further details.