Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys Survey Design Workshop

1. MICS Survey Design Workshop Multiple Indicator Cluster SurveysSurvey Design Workshop Interpreting Field Check Tables

2. Introduction • MICS surveys are tools to collect high-quality data on a range of globally agreed-upon indicators and national priorities • MICS surveys typically use various systematic checks before, during and after survey implementation to ensure that data quality is high

3. Introduction • Simultaneous data entry should begin about 1 week after fieldwork begins • Simultaneous data entry provides a suitable platform for • Data quality checks during field work • Providing recommendations to field staff during implementing phase to improve fieldwork

4. Introduction • Set of tables covering: • Completion and Response rates • Age reporting • Birth date reporting • Question responses • Quantity of observations – vaccination cards, birth registration cards, height & weight • Completeness of responses – age of death

5. Introduction • Tables provide totals for each indicator and disaggregate information by the field team • This information allows field supervisors to identify which specific teams have implementation issues and where these issues are most common

6. Introduction • Field Check Tables are generated by standard MICS programmes • Produced every 1-2 weeks by data processing staff • Revised by the survey coordinator from the implementation agency in collaboration with UNICEF • Suitable recommendations can then be made to field staff for immediate implementation

7. FC-1: Household response rate • This is the first indication of how well teams are able to successfully locate, identify and complete household interviews • Expected to be from 90 to 95 per cent • Below 90 per cent require immediate action to increase rates

8. Reading Field Check Tables FC-1: Household response rate

9. FC-1: Household response rate • In this example, the household response rate is high (95.4 per cent) • Teams 2, 3 and 4 all have response rates higher than 95 per cent (see last column) • Teams 1 and 5 have rates that are below this and would need to have specific attention from the survey coordinator to improve the quality of their performance

10. FC-2C: Eligible children under 5 per household • Based on information from other sources (national census and other surveys), MICS survey coordinators are able to predict: • how many women, children and men there are in the households interviewed • determine if field teams are adequately capturing this population during field work

11. FC-2C: Eligible children under 5 per household • FC-2W, FC-2C and FC-2M examine the mean number of eligible women, children and men that is expected in a household • As household size varies by place of residence of respondents, figures in these tables are disaggregated by urban/rural

12. FC-2C: Eligible children under 5 per household • The target is the minimum mean number of eligible children under 5 years of age per HH that we hope to find • It should be > 80% of what was expected at the time of sample design • Thus, if we expected to find 1.2 children under 5 years of age per HH at the time of sample design, teams should be finding a minimum of 0.96 children under 5 years of age per HH

13. Reading Field Check Tables FC-2C: Eligible children under 5 per household

14. FC-2C: Eligible children under 5 per household • Only two teams were able to meet the target (for both urban and rural areas) • The supervisors and editors should revise the household questionnaires for teams that didn’t meet the target to ensure that the ages of children are correctly recorded and calculated by the interviewers

15. FC-4W: Age displacement: women • Age displacement is an especially critical issue as the eligibility for interview in MICS is age-dependent • Ages may be displaced to make an eligible respondent older or younger which may affect the eligibility of the respondent

16. FC-4W: Age displacement: women • FC-4W, FC-4C, and FC-4M show the ages of women, children and men by team • Survey coordinators should examine the overall smoothness of the ages of women, children and men in these tables and the ratio of ages specified in the tables

17. Reading Field Check Tables FC-4W: Age displacement: women

18. FC-4W: Age displacement: women • The totals do not appear to be smooth • From age 14 to age 15 there is a steep decline in the number of women interviewed, producing a ratio of 0.77 • This indicates that many women were displaced from age 15 to age 14

19. FC-4W: Age displacement: women • In cases where the age displacement ratios are lower than 0.8, field supervisors and editors should review questionnaires first to ensure that age calculations are correctly made • In cases where specific teams have excess age displacement, supervisors may decide to observe interviews while they are in progress

20. FC-7: Birth date reporting • Completeness of birth reporting refers to the amount of data that an interviewer is able to get from a respondent regarding age • Age is composed of the year of birth, month of birth and age of the respondent, according to the respondent • Role of the interviewer is to gather a complete set of information on age i.e. year of birth and month of birth

21. FC-7: Birth date reporting

22. FC-7: Birth date reporting • In the case of teams 1 and 4, there were many respondents who only provided year of birth only (column 3) or year of birth and age (column 2) • For these teams, it is recommended that interviewers probe respondents more to determine the missing information before further proceeding with the interview

23. FC-8: Question responses by team • For many questions in MICS, there is already an expected level of certain indicators • From past recent surveys, we may already know, for example, the percentage of women who are currently pregnant or who have had a live birth in the previous two years • Tables FC8 verify that levels of selected indicators in the MICS are similar to expected levels

24. FC-8: Question responses by team • These tables also show the variation in the levels of these indicators by team • Overall, the variation in levels should be small • When different teams show widely differing levels on the survey coordinators and field supervisors should also review these tables to ensure that teams show a deviation in the overall pattern of responses

25. FC-8: Question responses by team

26. FC-8: Question responses by team • Table shows that 3.3 per cent of women had live birth in the last two years • We may know from a previous MICS survey that this level was 5.6 per cent • One possible interpretation of this finding is that interviewers may record some women as “no live birth in the last two years which effectively reduces the workload of interviewers • Field supervisors should look out for unusual levels of these indicators and verify that results are accurate with revisits to households if necessary

27. FC-9: Birth registration • This table shows the proportion of birth certificates seen by interviewers for children under five • As a measure of data quality, interviewers ask to see the birth certificates (or equivalents in the country) of children under five to ensure that these documents exist • In MICS, at least 90 per cent of birth certificates should be seen

28. FC-9: Birth registration

29. FC-9: Birth registration • Overall, no team surpassed the 90 per cent requirement • Supervisors should observe if interviewers request to see the birth certificates from mothers/caretakers at the beginning of the interview • Supervisors should ensure that interviewers probe respondents for the birth certificates and explain why it is important to see them

30. FC-9: Birth registration • Interviewers should note that birth registration may carry a legal burden in some countries and may be a sensitive issue • Therefore, interviewers should re-affirm to respondents that the information that the respondent gives is confidential

31. Thank you