1 / 10

Assessing validation effectiveness – results from a recent MEETS project and future plans

Assessing validation effectiveness – results from a recent MEETS project and future plans. Anette Hertz, Head of section, Statistics Denmark (ahz@dst.dk). Agenda . Introduction Method to calculate efficiency Problems encountered in the project Results Example from the project

Download Presentation

Assessing validation effectiveness – results from a recent MEETS project and future plans

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. Assessing validation effectiveness – results from a recent MEETS project and future plans Anette Hertz, Head of section, Statistics Denmark (ahz@dst.dk)

  2. Agenda • Introduction • Method to calculateefficiency • Problems encountered in the project • Results • Example from the project • Future plans • Comments

  3. Introdoction • The motivation: • Weexperiencediminishingresources, howeverwetry to keep the same qualitylevel. Hencewe must be more efficient in ourvalidation of the Intrastat declerations. • How effectiveare the individualvalidation procedures? • Is it possible to optimize the validation of the Intrastat declarations by reorganizing the order of the validation procedures?

  4. Method to calculateefficiency • The plan is to compareinitiallyreportedtrade to the final tradefigures. • How big is the change in: • Value • Quantity • Supplementaryunit • How manychanges of the type: • Change in date • Flow • Country • Transaction code • Commoditycode • PSI

  5. Problems encountered in the project • Problems retrivingbefore and after data on some of the separate validation procedures • For somevalidation procedures it waspossible to do thisthanks to our status code system • Not possible to get an accurateresourceestimate • Weasked the clericalworkers for theirbestestimate • Still looking for a more accurateway to estimatethis

  6. Results

  7. Example from the project • The standard unit valuesare at the base of recontactingPSIs for validation of probableerrors • Sinceweonly send out letters to PSIs for validation in around 1% of the 36 miorecordswereceiveeachyear it is importantthat it is the right 1% we send out • Wefound out that the standard unit value check is not prioritized by the clericalworkers • The result: • The accuracy of the probableerrordetection model has decreasedbecause of this

  8. Future plans • Plan to develope a more sophisticated status code system • Whenpossible to seperate the differentvalidation processes, analyze if resourcescanbediminished by reorganizing the procedures • Plan to measure the efficiency of VAT against Intrastat validation by running the statisticalproduction with and withoutthisvalidationprocess • Find ways to helpimproveour standard unit values and makethem more robust

  9. Comments • Do you have anyexperience on: • Measuringefficiency of validation procedures • Estimate the use of resources • Validate and preserve standard unit values

  10. Thank you for your attention Questions?

More Related