1 / 38

Statistics Canada’s proposed Household Survey Strategy

Statistics Canada’s proposed Household Survey Strategy. Sylvie Michaud, Statistics Canada Mannheim, Germany November 14, 2007. Why a household survey strategy. Too costly and too slow

conley
Download Presentation

Statistics Canada’s proposed Household Survey Strategy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Statistics Canada’s proposedHousehold Survey Strategy Sylvie Michaud, Statistics Canada Mannheim, Germany November 14, 2007

  2. Why a household survey strategy • Too costly and too slow • Labour Force Survey – our traditional platform for ad hoc survey work -- is “maxed out”, restricting our ability to take on new surveys at reasonable cost • Increasing use of cell phones casts doubt on the future of Random Digit Dialing (RDD) surveys… • …as do declining response rates • Need to increase capacity to conduct surveys is a cost-effective way

  3. Context : Budget review • Likely every four year for every department • STC in the first phase review • Actual target is not final yet • Direct impact on us; may be on cost recovery ?

  4. Collection infrastructure • Three infrastructures for social surveys; most interviews done with computer assisted interviewing • Decentralised field collection (CAPI) • Centralised under 3 Regional Offices (CATI) • Ottawa (small) • Collection done using Blaise • Different management systems for different environments

  5. Research to add efficiency on collection process : outside HSS

  6. Stock-taking: overview of existing survey program • Study in 2005 on size, scope, cost of household survey program • Based on about 15 surveys • All used samples drawn from households • Either base funded or recurring cost-recovery

  7. Scope: 5 monthly surveys • Labour Force Survey (LFS) • Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) • General Social Survey (GSS) • Travel Survey of Residents of Canada (TSRC) • Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey (CTUMS)

  8. Scope: annual and other surveys • Annual • Survey of Household Spending (SHS) • Canadian Internet Use Survey (CIUS) • Residential Telephone Services Survey (RTSS) • Less frequent (examples) • Survey of Financial Security (SFS) • Adult Education and Training Survey (AETS) • Survey of Household Energy Use (SHEU) • Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics (SLID)

  9. Some facts about these surveys • To collect the data, we contact about 300,000 households per year • Once selected, some households are contacted repeatedly (LFS) • About one third of budget comes from external sources • About two thirds of budget goes to data collection activities

  10. Foundations for the strategy • Efficient use of field capacity • Frames for social surveys • Governance • Flexibility for contacting respondents

  11. Spreading interviewing workload and response burden • Uneven interviewing workload increases cost – annual cycle of hiring, training, releasing interviewers to cope with peaks • Also between-year fluctuations • Over-burdened respondents cannot realistically be recontacted – and this is key to increasing capacity • Measures already taken: • Redesign of Survey of Household Spending • Uniform monthly workload for Canadian Community Health Survey

  12. Annual distribution of field workload

  13. Frames for supplements • Proposal to remove TSRC from LFS, to increase capacity • TSRC is constant LFS companion: • Every month 1/3 of LFS sample gets TSRC • One person per household, non-proxy • Feeds SNA (inter-provincial flow tables of domestic travel expenditures), TSA, provincial monitoring of tourism trends • Since inception in 1979, survey has consumed growing share of LFS capacity: • Biennial  annual • Quarterly  monthly • One sixth of LFS sample  one third

  14. Issues with frames • Costly to run supplements because no capacity for supplements to LFS • RDD may not be viable in medium term • Difficult to select specific sub-populations • Frames updates are costly and might not be efficient

  15. LFS supplementary survey program before and after TSRC

  16. TSRC removed from LFS supplement should bring capacity • TSRC as a LFS supplement hinders capacity to quickly and efficiently conduct supplements related to Labour Market and synergy in topic not there • Pilot project May 2008 • Fresh sample for TSRC • Varying recall periods • Longitudinal design • If this was done, this would re-establish capacity to conduct supplements • Timing of the redesign is an issue

  17. Integrated household survey platform Core content LFS & Supplements Core content CCHS Core content SHS & Supplements Core content GSS Core content TSRC Master Sample (Approx 260K hhlds per year, with standard core content) Ad hoc/ smaller survey Ad hoc / smaller survey Ad hoc / smaller survey Ad hoc / smaller survey

  18. Survey integration • Identical core questions for all surveys (demographics, etc) • Create a master sample using households exiting from “1st phase” surveys • Draw on master sample for other (2nd phase) surveys • Harmonized content modules (18 groups of variables) for new surveys

  19. Master sample integration • Pilot project April – May 2008 • Conducted on an on-going survey currently done with RDD • Targetting population people aged 45 and over • Test logistics but also impact on estimates from the two methodologies

  20. Sampling frames • Address Register becomes frame for selecting dwellings in urban areas (~65% of sample) • Dual frame in rural areas • Telephone list frame • Area frame • Dual frame combines quality of area frame with cost-effectiveness of telephone list frame • All innovations already partially in use: • LFS has used Address Register • CCHS has used telephone list frame in a dual frame context

  21. Links frames Updates (admin, listing) NEW AR permanent GEO (NGD) LFS, etc. permanent

  22. Governance - internally • Standards • Content • system • Interactions with collection • Links with Census • Organisationnal impact ?

  23. Governance – • Testing tripartite governance for longitudinal surveys • Statistics Canada, policy departments, researchers • Across surveys ?

  24. Northern strategy • Opportunity to examine options for best approach in North • Aim is to manage burden and yield data that are as useful as possible • Co-development approach, involving territorial governments, other stakeholders and Statcan

  25. Contact strategy • Need to be multi-mode • Mode of choice varies depending on the age of respondents • Trends are changing • Cell phone only is increasing, along with Voice over IP

  26. Which way would like to be contactedenvironics survey n=1965

  27. Survey methods most preferred: respondents who prefer more than one wayenvironics

  28. Future Census completion – mode preference By ageenvironics n=1965

  29. Internet option for respondents • Build on success of Census Internet option • Assumptions: • 1st interview is interviewer-administered • Respondent can opt for Internet after that • Fallback to CATI • Short supplements (with proxy) still viable • Two pilots with internet in November • Need to build a more robust master control system

  30. Use of other information • Administrative files: • How far and what is respondents perception ? • How does it impact on access ? • Use of Census • Geographic information • As a frame • As a data source for longitudinal analysis ?

  31. Summary • We started two years ago • We wanted to position our strategic thinking for the next five years • Likely not be finished in year 5 however • Starting to see some cost savings with load levelling but it’s more than costs savings

  32. Survey of Household Spending • Monthly collection • Key variables collected from all households (30 minutes) • Sample then divided into two subsamples, to respond to a subset of more detailed spending questions • Recall periods defined according to the type of expenditure • Capacity for rotating supplementary content (wealth, health, environment…)

  33. Lining up activities and directions with original objectives • Increased capacity • Master sample • More monthly surveys • LFS capacity freed up • Improved cost-effectiveness • Increased use of AR & new sampling strategies • Interviewer workload more uniform • Harmonized content modules • Faster turnaround times • Harmonized content modules

  34. Lining up activities and directions with original objectives • Increasing prevalence of cell phones • Dwelling-based approach • Rising non-response rates • Multi-modal approach: more options for respondents • Burden spread more uniformly (and managed)

  35. declining response rates : Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics

  36. Context :Households with cell phone only • Nationally, 90% have a land line • Households with cell phones only increased from 1.9% to 5% in past 3 years • 10.6% use voice over IP • Rate for low income household almost twice that of other households

  37. Household survey strategy • Spread interviewer and response burden • Survey integration • Increase response options • Greater use of list frames for sampling

More Related