Results Generated from the Questionnaire Disseminated Prior to the Workshop Pres. 1

United Nations Regional Workshop on the 2010 World Programme on Population and Housing Censuses: Census Evaluation and Post Enumeration Surveys

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 14-18 September 2009

Results Generated from the Questionnaire Disseminated

Prior to the Workshop

Pres. 1



The Objective of the Questionnaire

• To better understand census evaluation activities at the country level

• To facilitate the sharing of experience on methods of census evaluation among countries in the region



Was PES conducted for 2000 censusYes : 11 No: 6

8 countries did not return the questionnaire

• All countries involved National statistical/population census offices in planning and conducting PES except Egypt

• 7 countries where PES team different from census team (Ghana, Lesotho, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia)

• 4 countries used same team for planning census & PES (Kenya, Liberia, Mozambique, Namibia)



Funding

• Planned as part of the census programmed in all countries except Egypt, Ghana and Kenya

• Funding adequate in 5 countries (Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria and South Africa)



Objectives of PES• Estimate census coverage

• Characterize missed or over-counted individuals

• Estimate under-count and over-count for adjusting census results

• Learn quality of information collected – content analysis

• Obtain information for design of future censuses and surveys



Recruitment and training of PES staff• All countries selected enumerators and supervisors directly from

those used in census except 4 (Egypt, Nigeria, South Africa and Zambia)

• Selection criteria includes: Academic qualification and skills Experience, competence and performance in past

enumeration/supervision assignments Location e.g. worked in different areas for the census

• Training periods: About 2-14 days for most countries 21 days for enumerators in Nigeria



PES sampling designs• Stratified cluster sampling (one stage) was the most common

design

Stratified on regions/provinces and urban-rural dichotomy Sampling proportional to size in Mozambique and Zambia

• Two stage designs in South Africa and Liberia

• Three stage designs in Egypt, Ghana and Nigeria Systematic random sampling used in Nigeria



Sample size for 1st stage units

• EAs were the primary sampling units in most countries• Sample sizes for EAs range from 224 EAs in Lesotho to 600 EAs in South Africa• Mozambique had a minimum of 30 EAs for each province and 40 for the biggest stratum (the capital

city, Maputo)

• 352 in Liberia (5% of a total of 7026 EAs)

• 6 domains were sampled for 1st stage in Egypt (with 3 stage design)



Domains of analysis

• National (all countries)• Most countries also included

Urban-rural and regional (provincial) analyses District level as well in Ghana

• Only at national level in Nigeria?

• Egypt had also analyses for the capital and big cities



Matching methods and documentation of rules• Matching method

Manual: 5 (Kenya, Namibia, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia) Computer: 2 (Egypt and Mozambique) Combination: 4 (Ghana, Lesotho, Nigeria and South Africa)

• Documentation of rules

Yes:8 (Egypt, Kenya, Lesotho, Mozambique, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania and Zambia) No: 2 (Ghana and Namibia)



Field reconciliation visits

Yes: 9 (Egypt, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia)

No: 2 (Mozambique and Namibia)

Note that the field reconciliation process was not completed in Kenya



• Nearly all countries used the coverage rate as coverage measure.

• Lesotho and South Africa also used the net coverage rate.

Some of the coverage measures used



For content analysis the following were considered

• Lesotho and South Africa calculated rate of agreement, net difference rate and index of inconsistency

• Lesotho also calculated gross error rate

• South Africa also calculated gross difference rate (and off-diagonal proportion)

• Zambia intended to calculate content error (but the process was not completed due to technical and funding constraints)

• The content analysis was also not completed in Kenya



Producing report to inform lay users• Planned to produce reports for lay users (5 countries – Egypt, Ghana,

Lesotho, South Africa and Tanzania)• Not planned to produce reports (Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda and Zambia)• All countries that planned to produce reports did so except Ghana• Periods of 3 to 36 months from data collection to publication of PES

reports for lay users

• Internal reports took periods ranging from 3 weeks for Nigeria to about 30 months in case of Uganda and Zambia

• The process was not completed in Kenya



Using PES/census evaluation results to adjust census figures

Yes : 5 countries (Kenya, Mozambique, Nigeria, South Africa and Tanzania) No: 6 countries (Egypt, Ghana, Lesotho, Namibia, Uganda and

Zambia)

Coverage rates used to adjust total population at national and provincial domains of estimation



Some details on adjusting census figures

• In South Africa net undercount rate was used to calculate adjustment factors within homogenous groups Groups defined using Chi-square Automatic Interaction

Detection techniques Hierarchical model estimation

• In Kenya, though matching was not fully done, matched and reconciled data showed census undercount. A consultant assisted in adjusting figures.



Reasons and challenges for not adjusting census figures• Incomplete analysis (Ghana and Zambia)

Technical and funding constraints in Zambia

• Namibia only matched households and not individual information

• Errors within acceptable limits Coverage rate and other errors were within acceptable limits in Tanzania Under-coverage of 5.6% in Uganda was also deemed to be

within acceptable limits



• Different field staff (Nigeria and South Africa).

• Assigning field staff to areas different to where they worked during census Enumerators and supervisors in Lesotho, Namibia and Uganda; Supervisors in Kenya and Zambia

• A different organization conducted PES in Egypt and Nigeria

• Different team for planning, implementation and quality control of PES in Tanzania

To achieve independence for PES:



• An independent consultant supervised PES implementation in Uganda

• A different technical committee was responsible for the PES in Zambia

• In Kenya, different starting point Within an EA for the PES to that for census; also sampling independently done from headquarters and later sent to field teams

To achieve independence for PES (cont’d)



Highlight of lessons learned

• Ghana: Planning, documentation and independent body to organize the PES are essential

• Lesotho: Importance of independence of PES; some knowledge and experience in planning and implementation

• Mozambique: Need for Piloting PES; organizing short training courses in PES methodology for PES team

• Namibia: Some households were omitted due to poor supervision in some areas; accessibility difficulties due to locked gates

Also could not match individual information due to shortage of staff



Highlight of lessons learned (cont’d)

Nigeria: Potential problems include nomadic and seasonal movements e.g. cattle keepers and farmers and the area was large

South Africa: Bias on adjusting for smaller geographical levels due to smaller samples

Different undercounts for different geographical levels Need for new methods to account undercount at lower geographical levels Prolonged census field operations delays those of the PES Manual matching was required to correct implementation deficiencies of computer matching

Tanzania: To plan PES with the main census e.g. documentation, design

questionnaire and sampling



Highlight of lessons learned (cont’d)Uganda:

To plan PES with the main census Need for piloting PES

Zambia:

Need for same format for census and PES questionnaires Need for computer matching

Review maps not updated during census Need for appropriate time frames and good timing e.g. flow of resources

Kenya: Need of independent staff for PES

Plan PES as an integral part of census Need to do PES within a month after census for memory recall

Plan PES funding within census budget Need for capacity building especially computer matching



• Many countries (11) are planning to do PES (Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia)

• Egypt and Nigeria are not planning to do PES

• Mauritius has not yet finalized plans

• No information on Liberia, Sudan as well as Southern Sudan

PES for 2010 round



• Assess quality of census data i.e. determine coverage and content errors (at different geographical levels)• Find sources and causes of errors; • Examine characteristics of persons missed in the census• Examine implications of any coverage deficiencies on census data• Provide census data accuracy indicators to users (e.g. coverage and response quality indicators)• Adjust census results for under-count or over-count• Update population estimates and Geographic Information Systems• Develop and update sampling frames and population registers (e.g. for intercensal surveys)• Learn how to improve future censuses and surveys

Some of the objectives mentioned for PES for 2010 round



Thank You

END

Documents

Results Generated from the Questionnaire Disseminated Prior to the Workshop Pres. 1