1. Quality Criteria
Final Criteria

2. Scope
We’re focusing on quality of the flash estimate, not the quality of the GDP estimate
We’re also looking at setting the quality criteria that need to be met before first publication of a EU28 and EA18 flash estimate
For this reason the horizontal working group have focused on:
Accuracy
Timeliness
At the June 2014 task force meeting it was also suggested we add a communication plan criteria

3. Final Paper A final paper has been presented to the task force
This paper was agreed in principal and presented to the wider National Accounts Working Group in May 2015
NAWG did not suggest any particular change to the paper or criteria
At the June task force only small drafting changes were suggested
These have been made and therefore the paper and criteria are considered final

4. Acceptance Criteria 1 – Bias Criteria
The aim of this acceptance criteria is to test whether the flash estimate provides an unbiased estimate of what T+45 growth will be:
T+30 should be an unbiased estimate of GDP growth at T+45, with an average revision between and 0.05, and no more than 66.7% of revisions in the same direction
This is probably the most desirable property of a ‘flash’ estimate of a statistic
Our main difficulty will be testing this with only 16 quarters of data available (8 real, 8 retrospective).
Statistical tests were ruled out due to the limited number of quarters being available (see Annex A)

5. Acceptance Criteria 2 – Scale/Size
This acceptance criteria compares the size of revision between T+30 & T+45, and T+30 & T+65
The average absolute revision for T+30 GDP growth should be within 0.10 ppt compared with T+45 GDP growth estimate, and 0.13 ppt compared with T+65 GDP growth estimate.
As with criteria one, using statistical tests was ruled out due to insufficient number of data points
When setting this criteria consideration was given to the revisions performance of the US Flash estimate (presented in paper)
There was also discussion around the fact that the EU28 estimate is a developing statistic and that one could assume revisions may improve as members states method evolve

6. Acceptance Criteria 3 – Timeliness
This acceptance criteria is designed to ensure enough member states can deliver to deadline consistently to produce quality results at the EU28 and EA18 level
For the final two quarters of 2015 Eurostat needs to receive 70% of last year’s EU Member States GDP by the T+29 deadline
This criteria is set to safeguard against the publication of a T+30 flash before it has been proven the timeliness can be adhered to on a consistent basis
In addition to this criterion there should also be no known reasons why the criteria wouldn’t be met for each quarter of 2016 and beyond.

7. Acceptance Criteria 4 –Communication
This acceptance criteria is designed to ensure users are well informed about the estimate and it’s strengths and weaknesses
Key milestones of the communication plan should be met or plans in place to meet before publication of the T+30 flash estimate
This criteria is set to safeguard against the publication of a T+30 flash before users understand how it should be interpreted
Outstanding Work
Linked to the communication working group

8. Thank you
There has been a large amount of discussion around quality criteria since the second working group meeting
Various issues have been raised and considered when developing the 4 criteria
The discussions within the task force meetings have been helpful in shaping the criteria and ultimately settling on criteria that can be used to inform the ‘go/no’ decision
Thank you all for your input

9. Questions?