1. Comment on EU precision requirements
EFS Evaluation Partnership Meeting Brussels

2. indicator values “are to be reported with a relative standard error (i
indicator values “are to be reported with a relative standard error (i.e. the standard error divided by the estimate) not exceeding 2%"
Reasons to use the „relative” precision requirement
none (?) when all indicators are measured on the same scale
Reasons not to use the „relative” precision requirement
Required sample size unknown before the survey
Huge samples may be required
Unrealistically high response rate may be required
Logical inconsistencies

3. Practical consequences – simulation
What will be the required sample size?
Scope
Investment Priority „Active Inclusion…”
Reporting for AIR 2019
All relevant common longer-term result indicators
Assumptions
Took real data on participant population and indicator values from a Polish programme
Stratified sample – proportional allocation + booster

4. Precision requirements
Three versions tested
EC proposal from Rome – relative std error ≤ 2%
(margin of error ≤ 4% of the estimated ind. value
margin of error < 4% of the population size)
Standard error ≤ 2% of the population size
(margin of error ≤ 4% of the population size)
Standard error ≤ 5% of the population size
(margin of error ≤ 10% of the population size)

5. Practical consequences
Rel std err ≤ 2%
Std err ≤ 2%
Std err ≤ 5%
Required sample size
7 822
1 386
Requirement met?
probably
yes
Required response rate
90%
15% 3%
Estimated cost €
€55 899
€26 937

6. Thank you for your attention!