Statistics Canada’s proposed Household Survey Strategy Sylvie Michaud, Statistics Canada Mannheim,...
-
date post
19-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of Statistics Canada’s proposed Household Survey Strategy Sylvie Michaud, Statistics Canada Mannheim,...
Statistics Canada’s proposedHousehold Survey Strategy
Sylvie Michaud, Statistics Canada
Mannheim, Germany
November 14, 2007
Why a household survey strategy Too costly and too slow
Labour Force Survey – our traditional platform for ad hoc survey work -- is “maxed out”, restricting our ability to take on new surveys at reasonable cost
Increasing use of cell phones casts doubt on the future of Random Digit Dialing (RDD) surveys…
…as do declining response rates
Need to increase capacity to conduct surveys is a cost-effective way
Context : Budget review Likely every four year for every department
STC in the first phase review
Actual target is not final yet
Direct impact on us; may be on cost recovery ?
Collection infrastructure Three infrastructures for social surveys; most
interviews done with computer assisted interviewing Decentralised field collection (CAPI) Centralised under 3 Regional Offices (CATI) Ottawa (small)
Collection done using Blaise Different management systems for different
environments
Research to add efficiency on collection process : outside HSS
SLID 2006 - Distribution of Attempts and Time Spent by Data Collection Phase
18%
35%
8% 7%
22%
10%10%
29%
37%
4%
13%8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Before f irstcontact
Betw een firstcontact &interview
Interview Before f irstcontact
After the f irstcontact
Nevercontacted
Response Non-Response
% Attempts
% Time Spent
Stock-taking: overview of existing survey program Study in 2005 on size, scope, cost of household survey
program
Based on about 15 surveys
All used samples drawn from households
Either base funded or recurring cost-recovery
Scope: 5 monthly surveys Labour Force Survey (LFS)
Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS)
General Social Survey (GSS)
Travel Survey of Residents of Canada (TSRC)
Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey (CTUMS)
Scope: annual and other surveys Annual
Survey of Household Spending (SHS) Canadian Internet Use Survey (CIUS) Residential Telephone Services Survey (RTSS)
Less frequent (examples) Survey of Financial Security (SFS) Adult Education and Training Survey (AETS) Survey of Household Energy Use (SHEU) Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics (SLID)
Some facts about these surveys To collect the data, we contact about 300,000
households per year
Once selected, some households are contacted repeatedly (LFS)
About one third of budget comes from external sources
About two thirds of budget goes to data collection activities
Foundations for the strategy Efficient use of field capacity
Frames for social surveys
Governance
Flexibility for contacting respondents
Spreading interviewing workload and response burden Uneven interviewing workload increases cost – annual
cycle of hiring, training, releasing interviewers to cope with peaks
Also between-year fluctuations
Over-burdened respondents cannot realistically be recontacted – and this is key to increasing capacity
Measures already taken: Redesign of Survey of Household Spending Uniform monthly workload for Canadian Community
Health Survey
Annual distribution of field workload
010000
2000030000
4000050000
6000070000
80000
j f m a m j j a s o n d j f m a m j j a s o n d
current
future
Frames for supplements Proposal to remove TSRC from LFS, to increase capacity TSRC is constant LFS companion:
Every month 1/3 of LFS sample gets TSRC One person per household, non-proxy
Feeds SNA (inter-provincial flow tables of domestic travel expenditures), TSA, provincial monitoring of tourism trends
Since inception in 1979, survey has consumed growing share of LFS capacity: Biennial annual Quarterly monthly One sixth of LFS sample one third
Issues with frames
Costly to run supplements because no capacity for supplements to LFS
RDD may not be viable in medium term
Difficult to select specific sub-populations
Frames updates are costly and might not be efficient
LFS supplementary survey program before and after TSRC
# topics # labour related topics
1978 9 4
1979 8 5
1984 10 7
1989 11 5
1993 11 5
2005 3 0
2006 3 0
TSRC removed from LFS supplement should bring capacity TSRC as a LFS supplement hinders capacity to quickly
and efficiently conduct supplements related to Labour Market and synergy in topic not there
Pilot project May 2008 Fresh sample for TSRC
Varying recall periods Longitudinal design If this was done, this would re-establish capacity to conduct
supplements
Timing of the redesign is an issue
Integrated household survey platform
Core content
CCHS
Core content
SHS & Supplements
Core content
LFS & Supplements
Core content
TSRC
Master Sample(Approx 260K hhlds per year, with standard core content)
Core content
GSS
Ad hoc /smallersurvey
Ad hoc /smaller survey
Ad hoc/smallersurvey
Ad hoc / smallersurvey
Survey integration Identical core questions for all surveys (demographics,
etc)
Create a master sample using households exiting from “1st phase” surveys
Draw on master sample for other (2nd phase) surveys
Harmonized content modules (18 groups of variables) for new surveys
Master sample integration
Pilot project April – May 2008 Conducted on an on-going survey currently
done with RDD Targetting population people aged 45 and over
Test logistics but also impact on estimates from the two methodologies
Sampling frames Address Register becomes frame for selecting
dwellings in urban areas (~65% of sample) Dual frame in rural areas
Telephone list frame Area frame
Dual frame combines quality of area frame with cost-effectiveness of telephone list frame
All innovations already partially in use: LFS has used Address Register CCHS has used telephone list frame in a dual frame
context
AR
GEO(NGD)
LFS,etc.
Updates(admin, listing)
permanent
permanent
NEW
Links frames
Governance - internally Standards
Content system
Interactions with collection Links with Census
Organisationnal impact ?
Governance – Testing tripartite governance for longitudinal
surveys
Statistics Canada, policy departments, researchers
Across surveys ?
Northern strategy Opportunity to examine options for best
approach in North
Aim is to manage burden and yield data that are as useful as possible
Co-development approach, involving territorial governments, other stakeholders and Statcan
Contact strategy Need to be multi-mode
Mode of choice varies depending on the age of respondents
Trends are changing
Cell phone only is increasing, along with Voice over IP
Which way would like to be contactedenvironics survey n=1965
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
mail telephone internet visit
20052007
Survey methods most preferred: respondents who prefer more than one wayenvironics
No preference
In-person
Telephone
Paper
Internet26
54
39
25
26
15
7
5
1
1
2005
2007
Future Census completion – mode preference By ageenvironics n=1965
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
18-29
30-44
45-59
60+
internetpaperdk
Internet option for respondents Build on success of Census Internet option Assumptions:
1st interview is interviewer-administered Respondent can opt for Internet after that Fallback to CATI Short supplements (with proxy) still viable
Two pilots with internet in November Need to build a more robust master control system
Use of other information Administrative files:
How far and what is respondents perception ? How does it impact on access ?
Use of Census Geographic information As a frame As a data source for longitudinal analysis ?
Summary
We started two years ago We wanted to position our strategic
thinking for the next five years Likely not be finished in year 5 however
Starting to see some cost savings with load levelling but it’s more than costs savings
Survey of Household Spending
Monthly collection Key variables collected from all households (30
minutes) Sample then divided into two subsamples, to respond to
a subset of more detailed spending questions Recall periods defined according to the type of
expenditure Capacity for rotating supplementary content (wealth,
health, environment…)
Lining up activities and directions with original objectives Increased capacity
Master sample More monthly surveys LFS capacity freed up
Improved cost-effectiveness Increased use of AR & new sampling strategies Interviewer workload more uniform Harmonized content modules
Faster turnaround times Harmonized content modules
Lining up activities and directions with original objectives Increasing prevalence of cell phones
Dwelling-based approach
Rising non-response rates Multi-modal approach: more options for respondents Burden spread more uniformly (and managed)
declining response rates : Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics
Wave
Panel
1 2 3 4 5 6
1993 93.3 89.6 86.5 83.9 82.4
81.5
1996 89.5 86.7 85.2 82.7 78.5
77.4
1999 83.9 83.0 83.0 79.6 76.4
73.7
2002 81.2 83.2 78.3 75.0 … …
2005 78.8 … … … … …
Context :Households with cell phone only
Nationally, 90% have a land line
Households with cell phones only increased from 1.9% to 5% in past 3 years
10.6% use voice over IP
Rate for low income household almost twice that of other households
Household survey strategy Spread interviewer and response burden
Survey integration
Increase response options
Greater use of list frames for sampling