1. The First Rolling Integrated Census Methodology, Results & Flaws Pnina Zadka, Israel ECE/CES 2015 –Experts on Population and Housing Censuses

2. 2 Background Incentives for modification Diversions from previous census Methodology in “a nut shell” Implementation and data collection Results Results review and evaluation Content

3. 3 2008 Integrated Census (IC) 2008 Integrated Census (IC) Theoretical method –Dual Estimation System –Use of CPR as the backbone –Improved CPR with external data sources (ICPR) –Two independent samples to adjust the ICPR Under registration - area sample with CAPI Over registration - sample from ICPR with CATI Record linkage of both survey responses to ICPR

4. 4 Incentives for Modifications Organizational constrains evolving from future strategic plans Produce more timely and updated estimates in a era of rapid changes Reduce cost and insure budget flow Graduate progress towards a full register based census

5. 5 Rolling Integrated Census (IRC) Principles Maintain IC methodology Maximize use of current surveys (adjust surveys for compatibility) Increase use of administrative sources Census procedures incorporated into current workflow and reduce peaks Reduce response burden

6. 6 Diversions of IRC from 2008 IC Diversions of IRC from 2008 IC IRC 2011IC 2008 Two un-linked samplesLinked samples Dwelling Register (DR) as the sample frame for the under registration survey Area cells as the sample frame Sample size 10% of the HHSample size 20% of the HH Simultaneous data collection for both surveys Surveys conducted in a row with record linkage in between Data collection over 11 monthsData collection over 6 months LFS adjusted to complete census data LFS used as source for quality review

7. 7 Data Collection Training - –5 days for the CAPI –1 Day for CATI Sample size –“ U” sample + LFS sample = 22K+18K dwellings –“O” sample + LFS sample = 44K “administrative families” Response rate –“ U” = 87% (63,937 + 40,680 persons enumerated) –“O” = 74% (72,022 + 58,399 persons enumerated ) Time span of data collection –11 months for both surveys

8. 8 Calculated Estimates P LU = Under coverage parameter for locality P LU =persons residing in a locality and registered there persons enumerated in the locality P SU = Under coverage parameter for SA P LU =persons residing in an SA and registered there persons enumerated in the SA P o = Over coverage parameter for locality P LO = persons registered in a locality but not living there persons enumerayed in the locality P so = Over coverage parameter for SA Wight for locality ω L =1/ (P LU + P LO )

9. 9 Coverage parameters Higher Pu => higher quality ICPR Lower Po => higher quality ICPR 1≥Po,Pu≥0 If Po≈0 and Pu≈1 Move to full register based Census

10. 10 Results (1) Comparisons with 2008 IC P U parameters 95% of P U ( L,S ) were higher in 2011-RIC than in 2008-IC a. Significant improvement in the ICPR quality??? b. Biased parameter???

11. 11 Results (2) Comparisons with 2008 IC Po parameters 42% of Po ( L,S ) were higher in 2011-RIC than in 2008-IC ≈ Random expected variation No change in ICPR quality! No change in ICPR quality!

12. 12 Results (3) Comparison final estimates to current population estimates Estimated bias=5% -27%

13. 13 Methodological Review 1. High correlation between probability of correct registration in the DR and in the ICPR Chi-square = 67451, p value=0.00001 Cramer phi (φ c ) = 0.54 (no association =0) Odds ratio = 34.2 (no association =1) 2. No failure in linkage 3. No impact of prolonged enumeration period 4. Bias not correlated with size of locality 5. No detected bias in un-enumerated dwellings

14. 14 Enumeration procedures review 1. Minor deviation in following instruction manual by some interviewers (mainly by less experienced staff) 2. No exceeded refusals rate in RIC compared to current surveys, slightly higher than in 2008 IC

15. 15 Outcome 1. DR as sampling frame for under- coverage in the ICPR for census estimation is not yet appropriate due to high correlation with ICPR 2. Most available registers link their addresses to the CPR

16. 16 Decisions taken Terminate the pilot RIC and adjust census statistical methodology Return to the area sampling for the “U” sample (area cells) Two stage sample to improve area coverage

17. 17 What next? Develop Statistical models to predict quality registration in the ICPR Differential sample size according to probability of correct registration in the ICPR Increase total annual sample size Conduct a pilot census over two consecutive years Technological adjustments; tablets and internet

18. 18 Fennel in Sunset, Ilan Zadka-Schuldiner Thank You