Statistics Denmark communicating methodology Ulla Agerskov

1. Statistics Denmark communicating methodology Ulla Agerskov • Topic (iv): Good practices in communicating methodology Work Session on the Communication of Statistics ▼ Berlin 29 May 2013

2. Aboutme • Ulla Agerskov, Senior Advisor, Communication Centre • uag@dst.dk, +45 3917 3939 • MScEconomics 1996 • Statistics Greenland 1997-2000 • Statistics Denmark since 2000 • Editor of Statistical Yearbook, News from Statistics Denmark, communication, Social medial, etc.

3. Program • Documentation and methodology • The challenges • Quality declarations – new setup • New ways of communicating methodology • Errata

4. Main types of documentation • ”What-documentation” – content of statistics • Quality-declarations and qualityreports • Concepts • Variables • Categories and codes (classifications) B. ”How-documentation” – howweproduce the statistics 1) Management : Business Case, Project plan, Status, Evaluation etc 2)  Work-processes: (workflow, user-guides, processdescriptions etc.) 3)  IT: Requirement-, Design-, Test-, Maintenance-documentsetc

5. Productivecommunicatorsof methodology

6. The challenge #1

7. The challenge #2 • Metadata is not co-ordinated and integrated to fullfill userdemands • Qualitydeclarations do not follow EU-standards • Variables: Presentation on the Internet is not consolidated – not consistent • Database of terms (not consolidated and consistent) • Metadata is not integratedwith the proces model in Statistics Denmark (Documentation is usually made after the productions of statistics) • and the communication of methodology

8. ”Metadata must beconnected and reusable” StatBank Methods/ ”Survey” Methods papers Quality declaration Variable/dataset Concept Variable database Concepts database Hvad betyder Classifications Klassifikationsdatabase Class database

9. New projecton metadata • Purpose • to fulfillexternalusersneeds for metadata in connection with theiruse of statistics • Achieveinternalefficiency, one metadata-system easy to use for all users. • Detailedtargets • Prepere Peer Review in 2014: Implementation of relevant indicators from EU’s Quality Assurance Frame-work. • Fulfilldemands to the content of qualitydeclarations (EU-grant received).

10. Time schedule • 1. Pilot part 1 (spring 2013) • User needs: dst.dk (strategy, method, prototype etc) • Qualitydeclarations - simple version (demands, development and test on 5 statistics) • Work processes and guidelines • Terms and classifications (strategy, methods, etc.) • 2. Pilot part 2 (fall 2013) • Qualitydeclarations and metadata (demands, development and test on 5 statistics) • Courses, etc. • 3. Evaluation of pilots and plan for 2014 (November og December 2013) • 4. Adjustments and implementation (2014) • Demands, development and tests on 5 statistics • New setupimplemented • 6. Evaluation (November and December 2014)

11. Qualitydeclarations Present version: Loads of information Without angle Withouttargetgroup

12. Quality declaration – new setup Prototype Must be further developed - on the basis of input from internal and external users More news-oriented and targeted Must suit the needs of many different users: Specialists, journalists, students, etc. Introduction Contents Accuracy Comparability Accessibility Time Contact

13. New ways of communicating methodology • Subject pages – www.dst.dk • Videos

14. Errata An error is detected: Publishedinstantly on the web and errata send to subscribers of the statistics

15. Errata A brief explanation on the front page

16. Errorsin News from Statistics Denmark Trends in errors Based on a systematicreporting of errors: Explanation, type, etc.

17. Why and where? Data input: Serious errors Production: Mixed Errors in dissimination: Limited

18. The End!