170 likes | 252 Views
Research into an alternative sampling frame for the FRS. Antonia Simon, Development Team, DWP. Background to this research.
E N D
Research into an alternative sampling frame for the FRS Antonia Simon, Development Team, DWP
Background to this research • Research to use administrative data as an FRS sample frame undertaken as placement fellowship: funded by Economic Social Research Council (ESRC) and Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) • DWP is interested in better using its admin data - what potential for use as a sampling frame for the FRS? • Are there likely to be legal and ethical issues with using admin data for sampling? • This presentation focuses on the availability and potential of DWP-held admin data sources for sampling
Growing interest in administrative data • What possible advantages do administrative data have? - Potential to save cost and time - Potential to improve accuracy e.g. linking back survey responses to admin data which hold information on income - Reduce respondent burden • Can provide information on survey non-responders • Little use of admin. data for sampling frames in UK compared with other European countries
Research objectives • Assess main features of the current sampling frame for FRS • Identify suitable DWP-held income-based administrative data for future sampling of the FRS • Compare current and future extent of population coverage of current FRS sampling frame with the identified administrative sources • Identify any key ethical and technical considerations
Assessing the current FRS sampling frame • Small-users Postcode Address File (PAF) (approximates private households) • FRS frame using PAF: • Is a list of all addresses in Great Britain receiving < 50 items of post per day • May include some small businesses
Current FRS sampling • 2 stage sample drawn from the Postcode Address File (PAF): • stratified sample of primary sampling units (PSUs) - postcode sectors • systematic random sample of 24 addresses within each selected PSU
An alternative sampling frame for FRS would need to… • Provide similar coverage to the current FRS frame • For practicality be clustered into postcode areas • Provide full address information to enable a precise household to be drawn
2 DWP-held admin sources identified • Address Hierarchy File (AH file) • Part of the ‘Work and Pensions Longitudinal Study’ • Updated monthly • Historical record of addresses • DWP customers only • Customer Information System (CIS) • Updated nightly • Everyone with NINO, i.e. not just DWP customers • Includes people with NINO now living abroad
Assessing population coverage • Aimed to assess current and future extent of population coverage of DWP-held administrative data • Matched PAF frame for FRS to both CIS and AH file on: - Postcodes - Addresses • Postcodes assessed to be ‘valid’ or ‘invalid’ formats using British Standards ‘BS 7666’
Why differences in match-rates between postcodes and addresses? • AH is historical record of claimants’ receipt of state benefits / pension • Mixed quality of address information on CIS & AH including: • Information for flats being dropped • Suffixes on addresses being dropped • flat and house numbers becoming confused • Addresses have no street / house number
Non-matches: CIS to PAF • 330,000 postcodes (19% of all postcodes) on CIS failed to match to the PAF • 3 hypothesised reasons for this non-match: - Deceased individuals on CIS admin data - Deleted postcodes - no longer in use by Royal Mail e.g. demolished buildings - Foreign addresses
Analysing the non-matches: CIS to PAF • Foreign addresses – 0.5% non-match cases • Rest, ‘valid’ RM formats but non-match due to: • - Deleted postcodes - no longer in use by RM • - Dormant postcodes – postcodes formerly in circulation but not currently used by RM • - Large-user’ postcodes/addresses – excluded from small-users PAF as they receive > 50 items post daily
Key ethical & technical considerations of using administrative data as sampling frame • Ethical • List of addresses would be same as currently available in public arena (e.g. PAF, electoral register) • Technical • Dealing with addresses with poor data quality – e.g. ‘invalid’ addresses • Dealing with multiple entries of the same address • Excluding foreign addresses (on CIS)
Some conclusions • Overlap of current DWP-held admin data with PAF is high – better than anticipated at outset of this research • However, further work needed e.g. cleaning address information and an assessment of bias (if house names are always excluded) • Potential for FRS and other household surveys • More guided sampling if fuller use is made of admin data • Improved correction of non-response
Further info, please contact:a.simon@ioe.ac.uk or valerie.christian@dwp.gsi.gov.ukPublication:Simon, A. (April 2011). Using administrative data held by the Department for Work & Pensions as an alternative sampling frame for the Family Resources Survey. Economic & Labour Market Review. Vol. 5, 4, pp.15-21.http://www.statistics.gov.uk/articles/elmr/elmr-apr11.pdfAny questions???