NGA-NBS-MICS3 2007-v1.2
Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey MICS3 (2007), Nigeria
Third round
MICS3, NIGERIA 2007
English
Name | Country code |
---|---|
Nigeria | NGA |
Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey - Round 3 [hh/mics-3]
The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey, Round 3 (MICS3) is the third round of MICS surveys, previously conducted around 1995 (MICS1) and 2000(MICS2). MICS surveys are designed by UNICEF, and implemented by National Bureau of Statistics from Nigeria. MICS was designed to monitor various indicators identified at the World Summit for children and the Millennium Development Goals.
The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) was conceptualized to monitor the progress of Child Survival,
Development, Protection and Participation (CSDPP) Programme as well as to serve as means of data
generating mechanism for measuring the achievement and gaps in the targets of the millennium development
goals (MDGs), particularly as it may affect the children and women. At the World Summit for Social
Development in 1995, the need was also stressed for better social statistics if social development had to
move to centre stage for the cause of the children of the world.
The first in the series of the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS1) was conducted in 1995 by the
Federal Office of Statistics (FOS), now National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), with technical and funding
assistance from UNICEF. Since then, MICS has been institutionalized within the National Integrated Survey
of Households (NISH) in the National Bureau of Statistics, as a process of collecting regular, reliable and
timely social statistics. The second round of MICS was conducted in 1999 with a better strategy for the
execution of the survey from planning to report writing. Expectedly, the current edition of the Multiple
Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS3) was better planned, executed and has achieved the aim of providing
reliable data for monitoring progress of the Nigerian children and women, and the Millennium Development
Goals.
This report would have been impossible without the commitment of UNICEF, which provided technical and
financial assistance for the project. Worthy of mention also is the significant contribution of the officials
from UNICEF, Nigeria, namely: the Representative Mr. Ayalew Abai, Dr. Ahmed El Bashir Ibrahim (Chief,
Planning & Communication) and Mr. Johnson Awotunde, M&E Specialist. The National Bureau of Statistics
acknowledges the support and cooperation from all other stakeholders who took part in the project in various
forms. These include the National Planning Commission, the Federal Ministry of Health, the Federal
Ministry of Education, the Federal Ministry of Women Affairs, the Federal Ministry of Information and
Communication, the National Population Commission, various Non Government Oganizations. Others
include UNDP, DFID, World Bank and the MDG Office.
This report is based on the Nigeria Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey, conducted in 2007 by the National
Bureau of Statistics (NBS), Nigeria with financial and technical support from UNICEF, Nigeria. The survey
which was Nigeria copy of global MICS3 was a response to the needs to monitor progress towards goals and
targets emanating from recent international agreements including the Millennium Declaration, adopted by all
191 United Nations Member States in September 2000, and the Plan of Action of A World Fit For Children,
adopted by 189 Member States at the United Nations Special Session on Children in May 2002. Both of
these commitments build upon promises made by the international community at the 1990 World Summit for
Children.
The Federal Government of Nigeria has in recent times launched a number of development initiatives to
improve the economic and social life of its people. The National Programme for the Eradication of Poverty
(NAPEP) is concerned with strategies for poverty reduction; the National Action Committee on HIV/AIDS
(NACA) has the mandate for planning, implementing and monitoring programmes for control of HIV/AIDS;
the National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) focuses on wealth creation,
employment generation, corruption elimination and general value orientation; the state and local government
extensions of NEEDS are State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (SEEDS) and Local
Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (LEEDS) respectively. These and other programmes
are commitments towards targets as those contained in the Millennium Development Goals.
The Federal Government has also expressed strong commitment to, and declared as a matter of high priority,
efforts to monitor and evaluate progress towards the attainment of the benchmarks established in these
national and other global goals. The National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) with financial and technical support
from international development partners and donors like UNICEF has been involved in this effort through
provision of relevant data to monitor, evaluate and advise necessary adjustments in development policies and
programmes. The NBS, in recent times had conducted a number of national sample surveys mostly within
global generic contexts. The Nigeria Living Standard Survey (NLSS), the General Household Survey (GHS),
the Core Welfare Indicator Questionnaire Survey (CWIQ) and the 1999 Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey
(MICS2) are examples. MICS Nigeria 2007 has been designed to measure progress towards achievements of
the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) and other international targets like the Abuja Declaration on
malaria which are mainstreamed into the above-stated national commitments. Nigeria’s MICS3 is, therefore,
bound to improve the country’s data base and provide a valuable tool for evidence-based planning to
surmount its development challenges.
More specifically, MICS Nigeria 2007 should assist monitoring and evaluating UNICEF country
programmes including those on immunization, vitamin A supplementation, child development, child and
women rights and protection among others. The survey should also build survey capability and enhance data
analysis experience at the NBS. This executive summary report presents results on principal topics covered
in MICS Nigeria 2007 expressed in outcome and impact indicators1 that are important for designing,
monitoring and evaluating progress of national programmes and provide a means for comparing the situation
in Nigeria with that in other countries.
2. Survey Objectives
MICS Nigeria 2007 should provide up-to-date information on the situation of children and women in
Nigeria, strengthen national statistical capacity by focusing on data gathering, quality of survey information,
statistical tracking and analysis, contribute to the improvement of data and monitoring systems in Nigeria
and strengthen technical expertise in the design, implementation, and analysis of such systems. The survey
should also furnish data needed for monitoring progress toward the Millennium Development Goals, and
targets of A World Fit for Children (WFFC) among others, measure progress towards achievements of the
goals of NEEDS and its state and local government extensions, provide statistics to complement and assess
the quality of data from recent national surveys like Nigeria Living Standard Survey (NLSS), Nigeria Core
Welfare Indicator Questionnaires (CWIQ) and the National Demographic and Health Survey (NDHS).
1 For more information on the definitions, numerators, denominators and algorithms of Multiple Indicator
Cluster Surveys (MICS) and Millennium Development Goals (MDG) indicators covered in the survey: see
Chapter 1, Appendix 1 and Appendix 7 of the MICS Manual – Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey Manual 2005:
Monitoring the Situation of Children and Women, also available at www.childinfo.org.
Sample survey data [ssd]
Individual, Household
version 1.2
2008-08-26
v1.0 This is the first version used to generate the first set of tables original release in 2007
v1.2 The data set was re-edited to fixed the Day, Month and Year under Age variable when missing
HOUSEHOLD
(1) Household Information Panel
(2) Demographic Characteristics
(3) Water and Sanitation
(4) Household Characteristics
(5) Household use of insecticide treated nets
(6) Children Ophaned and made vulnerable children
(7) Child Labour
(8) Maternal Mortality
(9) Salt Iodization
WOMEN
(1) Women Information Panel
(2) Child Mortality
(3) Tetanus Toxoid
(4) Maternal and Newborn Health
(5) Marriage/Union
(6) Contraception and UNMET Need
(7) Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting
(8) HIV/AIDS
(9) Sexual Behaviour
CHILDREN
(1) Information Panel
(2) Birth Registration and Early Learning
(3) Child Development
(4) Vitamin A
(5) Breastfeeding
(6) Care of Illness
(7) Malaria
(8) Immunization
(9) Anthropometry
Topic | Vocabulary | URI |
---|---|---|
economic systems and development [1.4] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
income, property and investment/saving [1.5] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
rural economics [1.6] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
business/industrial management and organisation [2.2] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT [3] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
domestic political issues [4.2] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
mass political behaviour, attitudes/opinion [4.6] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
basic skills education [6.1] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
compulsory and pre-school education [6.2] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
post-compulsory education [6.5] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
vocational education [6.7] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
information society [7.2] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
childbearing, family planning and abortion [8.2] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
drug abuse, alcohol and smoking [8.3] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
general health [8.4] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
health care and medical treatment [8.5] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
environmental degradation/pollution and protection [9.1] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
housing [10.1] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
TRANSPORT, TRAVEL AND MOBILITY [11] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
children [12.1] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
family life and marriage [12.5] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
social and occupational mobility [12.8] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
community, urban and rural life [13.1] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
social change [13.7] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
fertility [14.2] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
social welfare systems/structures [15.2] | CESSDA | http://www.nesstar.org/rdf/common |
National Zone State Local government Sector (Urban,Rural)
The survey covered:
All de jure household members (usual residents);
All women aged 15-49 years resident in the household and;
All children aged 0 <5 years (under age 5) resident in the household.
Name | Affiliation |
---|---|
National Bureau of Statistics [nbs] | Federal Government of Nigeria |
Name | Affiliation | Role |
---|---|---|
United Nation Children Educational Fund | UNICEF, Nigeria | Funding & Technical assistance in Stakeholders meetings, monitoring |
Name | Abbreviation | Role |
---|---|---|
Fedral Government of Nigeria | FG | Funding |
United Nation Children Educational Fund | UNICEF | Funding |
National Bureau of Statistics | NBS | Funding |
Name | Affiliation | Role |
---|---|---|
Central Bank of Nigeria | CBN [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
Nigeria Institute of Social Economic Research | NISER [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
Office of the Senior Special Assisstance to the President | MDG office [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
National Agency for the Prohibition of Ttrficking In Persons | NAPTIP [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
Federal Ministry of Education | FME [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
Federal Ministry of Health | FMH [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
National Population Commission | NPopC [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
Federal Ministry of Justice | FMJ [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
National Planning Commission | NPC [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
Federal Ministry of Agriculture & Worter Rresouces | FMA&WR [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control | NAFDAC [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
Ministry of Finance, Budget & Planning | MFB&P [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
Federal Ministry of Environment | FME [FG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
State Planing Commission, Umuahia | ASPC [SG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
State Planing Commission, Calabar | CRSPC [SG] | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
World Health Organisation | WHO | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
The Bridge Inter Magazine | Jounalism | Added to the value of questionnaire during stakeholders Meeting |
Two - stage cluster sample design was adopted in each state where Enumeration Areas (EAs) form first stage or Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) and Housing Units (HUs) form second stage or Ultimate Sampling Units (USUs)
EAs demarcated for 1991 Population Census served as first stage sampling frame
Household listing was conducted in selected first stage units to provide second stage sampling frame
Sample sizes: Within each state of the federation 750 HUs was drawn from 30 EAs.
There were 36 states and Federal Capital Territory (FCT), this makes 37, which amounts to 27,750 Housing Units drawn from 1,110 EAs.
The sample for the Nigeria MICS3 was designed to provide estimates on a large number of indicators on the
situation of children and women at the country level, for urban and rural areas; and for each of the 36 States
of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory of Abuja. The States were the main reporting domains.
The sample design was two-stage in each state, where a systematic sample of 30 census enumeration areas
(EAs) was selected with equal probability to form the first stage or primary sampling units (PSUs). The
updated 1991 Population Census Enumeration Area demarcation was used because the latest demarcation
was not available for use at the time MICS3 sample was designed. Also, information about the household
composition of enumeration areas was not available to permit selection of EAs with probability proportional
to number of households in the enumeration area.
Household listing was conducted in each of the selected EAs to provide an adequate, up-to-date frame of
housing units as the secondary sampling units (SSUs). A systematic sample of 25 housing units was
subsequently drawn with equal probability within each of the selected EAs and all the households in each of
the selected HUs were canvassed. Thus, at state level, 750 HUs were drawn from 30 EAs which meant
27,750 HUs from 1,110 EAs at the national level. The sample was stratified by states and was hardly self
weighting at either state or national level. Hence, sample weights were used for reporting state or national
results.
All the selected enumeration areas were successfully canvassed. Table HH.1 presents a summary of results
of interviews of households, individual women aged 15 – 49 years and children aged less than five years. A
total of 28,603 households (20,825 rural and 7,778 in the urban sectors) were sampled. The total number of
occupied sampled households was 28,431 including 20,735 rural and 7,696 urban households. The total
number of interviewed households was 26,735 including 19,569 rural and 7,166 urban households. These
figures translated into 94.0 percent response rates for the total, 94.4 percent for the rural and 93.1 percent for
the urban. The total number of eligible women was 27,093 with 19,674 and 7,419 for rural and urban sectors,
respectively. The corresponding figures of interviewed women were 24,565, 17,928, and 6,637 respectively;
these figures amounted to 85.3, 86.0 and 83.3 percent effective response rates respectively for the total, rural
and urban sectors. Eligible children under-five years of age were 17,093, (12,898 rural and 4,195 urban) and
interviews were achieved for 16,549, 12,494 and 4,055 respectively; again the corresponding effective
response rates were 91.0, 91.4 and 90.0 percent respectively.
There were no deviation from sample Designed
We had 96% Response Rate
Table HH.1 presents a summary of results of interviews of households; individual women aged 15 –
49 years and in respect of children aged under-five years. A total of 28,603 households including
20,825 and 7,778 in the rural and urban sectors respectively were sampled; total number of
occupied sampled households was 28,431 including 20,735 rural and 7,696 urban households. Total
number of interviewed households was 26,735 including 19,569 rural and 7,166 urban households.
These figures translated into 94.0 percent response rates for the total, 94.4 percent for the rural and
93.1 percent for the urban. Total figure of eligible women was 27,093 including 19,674 and 7,419
for rural and urban sectors respectively while corresponding figures of interviewed women were
24,565, 17,928, and 6,637 respectively; these figures translated into 85.3, 86.0 and 83.3 effective
response rates respectively. Numbers of eligible under-five children were 17,093, 12,898 and 4,195
and interview was completed for 16,549, 12,494 and 4,055 respectively; again the corresponding
overall response rates were 91.0, 91.4 and 90.0 percent respectively. Urban-rural disparities in
response rates were quite marginal.
Table HH.1: Results of household and individual interviews
Numbers of households, women and children under 5 by results of the household, women's and under-five's interviews, and household,
women's and under-five's response rates, Nigeria, 2007
Households’ response rates varied from 81 percent in Osun State to 100 percent in Katsina State;
but the variations have been bridged across geopolitical zonal aggregates although the northern
zones show greater household response rates. This pattern of variation is true also of women and
under-five children response rates respectively. No immediate explanations could be adduced for
these differentials beyond the fact that the less educated North is ever more prepared to cooperate
with the interviewer and that the terrain in the North is friendlier for purposes of interviewing.
Detailed information attached as external document
Sample weights were calculated for each of the data files.. Sample weights for the household data were computed as the probability of selection of the household, computed at the sampling domain level (urban/rural within each state). The household weights were adjusted for non-response at the domain level, and then nomalised by a constant factor so that the total weighted number of households equals the total unweighted number of households. The hosehold weight variable is called HHWEIGHT and is used with the HH data and the HL data
Sample weights for the women's data used the un-nomalized household weights, adjusted for non-response for the women's questionnaire, and were then normalized by a constant factor so that the total weighted number of women's cases equals the total unweighted number of women's cases.
Sample weights for the children's data followed the same approach as the women's and used the un-nomalized household weights, adjusted for non-response fr the children's questionnaire, and were then normalized by a constant factor so that the total weighted number of children's cases equals the total unweighted number of children's cases
Estimation Procedures:
Let the probability of selecting the EA be fj and the probability of selecting the housing unit be fk. Then the product f = fjfk = 1 where fj = n and fk = h
Ys = Estimate for states
N = Total Number of EAs in states
n = Selected number of EAs in states
H = Total number of Housing Units listed in the jth EA
h = Selected number of Housing Units in the jth EA.
Xsj k = Value of the element in the kth housing unit of jth EA in states.
Wsjk = Weight of the element in kth housing unit of the jth EA in states.
The MICS Generic questionnaire based on MICS3 Model Questionnaire was used with some modifications and additons.
Household Questionnaire contained: Household Listing Form; Education; Water and sanitation; Household Characteristics;
Child Labour; Salt Iodization. Children Orphaned and made Vulnerable by HIV/AIDS; Insecticide – Treated Net (ITN);
Individual women contained: Child Mortality; Tetanus Toxoid; Maternal and Newborn Health HIV/AIDS; Female Genital Mutilation. Sexual Behaviour; Contraception and Unmet Need
Children Under Five contained: Birth Registration and Early Learning; Vitamin A; Breastfeeding; Care of Illness; Immunization; Anthropometry; Malaria; Child Development.
Household questionnaire was administered to all selected households, the women questionnaire was administered to all women age 15-49 years old in the selected households and children questionnaire to all children below the age of 5years in the selected households.
Data processing began from the Planning stage. Processing took place in the six geo-political zones of the Federation where the questionnaires were checked against cluster control sheet before the data entry.
If there were any missing questionnaire, there must be a quick contact with the team from the feild, for a re-interview of the respondent involved.
All completed quetionnaires were arranged cluster by cluster in numerical order of household number within the cluster (i.e from HH1 to HH10) and despatched to the zonal offices
Each cluster was followed by the selection sheets
Start | End | Cycle |
---|---|---|
2007-03 | 2007-04 | 30 Days |
Start date | End date | Cycle |
---|---|---|
2007-03 | 2007-04 | 30 Days |
Name | Affiliation | Abbreviation |
---|---|---|
National Bureau of Statistics | Federal Republic of Nigeria | NBS |
First level monitoring at National level by 18 NBS Headquarters staff and members of Central Technical Committee
Second level monitoring at state level by NBS 6 Zonal Controllers, 37 State Officers and other member of State Steering Committee
There were special monitoring Team from Unicef (Nigeria), at every stage of processing, i.e. from planning, trainings, data collection, data editing and entry, analysis, Report writing and dissemination.
Supervisors were NBS staff with experience and familiarization with local terrain. Enumerators were sourced internally and externally of NBS. Female enumerators were engaged at state level while supervisors and editors could be either male or female. Enumerators were fluent in local language for easy translation of the questionnaires content in local language where necessary.
There were two levels of training, the first was at the headquarters meant mainly for trainers at 2nd level (Ttraining of Trainers) It involved NBS Headquaters senior staff and Zonal Controllers. Selection of trainers for 2nd level was based on merit. Training lasted for 5 days.
The second level of training was for the interviewers, editors and supervisors. NBS Zonal Controllers and state officers also participated. The training was conducted simultaneously at all zonal headquarters of the six geo-political zones of the country. Each location had 2 training centers for easy assimilation of the training which lasted for 10 days.
The training contents covered among all:
Pilot Test was conducted immediately, after the first level training. 4 states were strategically selected to represent the country (Enugu and Osun states represent the southern part of the country were the training for the engaged enumerators here took place at Enugu state. Also Benue and Kano states represented the Northern part of the country, the training took place at Benue state) for pilot test. The pilot test was conducted between December 26-31, 2006)
Two roving teams were engaged for data collection per state. A team comprises of 6 persons (1 supervisor, 1 editor and 4 enumerators). Vehicles were provided for each team. Data collection lasted for 30 days.There were monitoring/quality checks to assure collection of good quality data.
Data editing began from the feild through the feild data editor and then the feild supervisor before getting to the state officers.
Then other stages through the processing include
(i) Desk officers at the zonal offices
(ii) Trained data editors from the headquarters sent to the zonal offices for data editing during the data entry
(iii) Data editing through the zonal offices editors before data entry
(iv) Competent data entry staff
The sample of respondents selected in the Nigeria Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey is only one of the
samples that could have been selected from the same population, using the same design and size. Each of
these samples would yield results that differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected.
Sampling errors are a measure of the variability between all possible samples. The extent of variability is
not known exactly, but can be estimated statistically from the survey results.
The following sampling error measures are presented in this appendix for each of the selected indicators:
?? Standard error (se): Sampling errors are usually measured in terms of standard errors for particular
indicators (means, proportions etc). Standard error is the square root of the variance. The Taylor
linearization method is used for the estimation of standard errors.
?? Coefficient of variation (se/r) is the ratio of the standard error to the value of the indicator
?? Design effect (deff) is the ratio of the actual variance of an indicator, under the sampling method used
in the survey, to the variance calculated under the assumption of simple random sampling. The
square root of the design effect (deft) is used to show the efficiency of the sample design. A deft value
of 1.0 indicates that the sample design is as efficient as a simple random sample, while a deft value
above 1.0 indicates the increase in the standard error due to the use of a more complex sample design.
?? Confidence limits are calculated to show the interval within which the true value for the population
can be reasonably assumed to fall. For any given statistic calculated from the survey, the value of that
statistics will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error (p + 2.se or p – 2.se) of
the statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical size and design.
For the calculation of sampling errors from MICS data, SPSS Version 15 Complex Samples module has
been used. The results are shown in the tables that follow. In addition to the sampling error measures
described above, the tables also include weighted and unweighted counts of denominators for each
indicator.
Sampling errors are calculated for indicators of primary interest, for the national total, for the regions,
and for urban and rural areas. Three of the selected indicators are based on households, 8 are based on
household members, 13 are based on women, and 15 are based on children under 5. All indicators
presented here are in the form of proportions. Table SE.1 shows the list of indicators for which sampling
errors are calculated, including the base population (denominator) for each indicator. Tables SE.2 to SE.9
show the calculated sampling errors.
Table SE.1: Indicators selected for sampling error calculations
List of indicators selected for sampling error calculations, and base populations (denominators)
for each indicator, Nigeria 2007
Table SE.2: Sampling errors: Country
Standard errors, coefficients of variation, design effects (deff), square root of design effects (deft) and confidence intervals for selected
indicators, Nigeria 2007
Table SE.3: Sampling errors: Urban
Standard errors, coefficients of variation, design effects (deff), square root of design effects (deft) and confidence intervals for selected
indicators, Nigeria 2007
Confidence limits Table
Table SE.4: Sampling errors: Rural
Standard errors, coefficients of variation, design effects (deff), square root of design effects (deft) and confidence intervals for selected
indicators, Nigeria 2007
Table SE.5: Sampling errors: North East
Standard errors, coefficients of variation, design effects (deff), square root of design effects (deft) and confidence intervals for selected
indicators, Nigeria 2007
Table SE6: Sampling errors: North East
Standard errors, coefficients of variation, design effects (deff), square root of design effects (deft) and confidence intervals for selected
indicators, Nigeria 2007
Table SE.7: Sampling errors: South East
Standard errors, coefficients of variation, design effects (deff), square root of design effects (deft) and confidence intervals for selected
indicators, Nigeria 2007
Table SE.8: Sampling errors: South South
Standard errors, coefficients of variation, design effects (deff), square root of design effects (deft) and confidence intervals for selected
indicators, Nigeria 2007
Table SE.9: Sampling errors: South West
Standard errors, coefficients of variation, design effects (deff), square root of design effects (deft) and confidence intervals for selected
indicators, Nigeria 2007
A series of tables and graphs were genenrated
Table DQ.1: Age distribution of household population
Single-year distribution of household population by sex (weighted), Nigeria, 2007
Table DQ.2: Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women
Household population of women age 10-54, interviewed women age 15-49, and percentage of
eligible women who were interviewed (weighted), by five-year age group, Nigeria, 2007
Table DQ.3: Age distribution of eligible and interviewed under-5s
Household population of children age 0-7, children whose mothers/caretakers were interviewed
and percentage of under-5 children whose mothers/caretakers were interviewed (weighted), by
five-year age group, Nigeria, 2007
Table DQ.4: Age distribution of under-5 children
Age distribution of under-5 children by 3-month groups (weighted), Nigeria, 2007
Table DQ.5: Heaping on ages and periods
Age and period ratios at boundaries of eligibility by type of information collected (Household
questionnaire, weighted), Nigeria, 2007
Table DQ.6: Percentage of observations missing information for selected questions and indicators
(Under-5 questionnaire, weighted), Nigeria, 2007
Table DQ.7: Presence of mother in the household and the person interviewed for the under-5 questionnaire: Distribution of children under five by
whether the mother lives in the same household, and the person interviewed for the under-5 questionnaire (weighted), Nigeria, 2007
Table DQ.8: School attendance by single age
Distribution of household population age 5-24 by educational level and grade attended in the current year, Nigeria, 2007
Table DQ.9: Sex ratio at birth among children ever born and living
Sex ratio at birth among children ever born, children living, and deceased children by age of women (weighted), Nigeria, 2007
Table DQ.10: Distribution of women by time since last birth
Distribution of women aged 15-49 years with at least one live birth (weighted), by months since
last birth, Nigeria, 2007
Quality assessment study of the data has confirmed a number of quality problems in MICS Nigeria 2007. In the
following paragraphs we set out these problems offering the likely causes as well as some of the possible
implications for data quality and accuracy of estimates of characteristics and indicators emanating from the data
Age Heaping
Large amount of heaping exists at ages with digits ending in 0 and 5 except at age 15.This exception is not genuine
being yet evidence of some other quality problem (Table DQ.1 Table DQ.5 and, Figure DQ.1)). Illiteracy
particularly un respect of women respondents, cultural bias for figures ending with 0 and 5, cultural practice that
counts in 5s, poor book keeping habit, burden of length of questionnaire, and other reasons Age heaping is also
evident in the male age data. This problem could lead to a false impression of the age structure resulting from some
over-representation of persons of ages ending in digits 0 and 5. There could be bias in weighted estimate of any
characteristic that depends on age structure e.g. mortality rate. Effect is less in respect of characteristics that depend
on age grouping where the ages ending 0 or 5 are less important and where differentials in respect of the
characteristics of interest about the heaps are trivial.
Out-Transfer of Ages of Women and Children
Large out-transfer of children from target group 0-4 year old (Table DQ.3, Figure DQ.2) and of women from the
target group 15-49 year-old was evident; a proof is the unlikely pyramidal structure of age distribution; some
children of genuine age 4 (or even lower) must have had their ages recorded as 5 or more years; also a good number
of women with true age 15 years or higher must have been recorded as 14 years old or younger; and some women
truly aged 49 years or lower have had their ages recorded as 50 or higher (Figure DQ.3). Possible effects of the outtransfers
could include a substantial detraction from the quality of the data and from the general accuracy of those
indicators that use differential weights that are derived from the relative frequency distribution of the ages. This
means that children aged 4 years and women aged 15 and 49 years respectively may have been poorly reflected in
the sample; it means that these children and women have been under-sampled, that is children aged 0-4 and women
aged 15-24, 45-49 and 15-49 may have been quite severely under-represented.
Estimates of group characteristics of the children under 5 and of women in each of the affected age groups stand
adequate and credible as long as sample size posed no serious precision problem. But combined estimates derived
from weighted estimation would have problem of bias particularly if there are differences across ages and age
groups.
Lower Response Rates Among Younger Women.
Differential response rates are noted across age group, lower among the younger women aged 15-24 years (Table
DQ.2) (Figure DQ.4); this translates in to differential representation and data accuracy across the age groups. The
likely effect includes a distortion of the weights and a bias in estimates. But response rate ranged from 86 to 95
percent; bottom 86 percent seems quite adequate though quite less than MICS3 suggested bottom figure of 90
percent The fear is that some bias in favour of the older women may result particularly in combined estimates across
ages; inevitably, this could detract from the accuracy of results particularly if the non-respondents coincide with a
sub-group with characteristics that are distinct from the rest of the population.
Incomplete information on dates, month, year of birth and marriage
Age data featured disproportionately large amount of ‘missing’ and ‘don’t know’ in data on dates of marriages of
women and births of children and adults. This is a a problem of the poor or the uneducated or the rural person the
poor; it is a problem aggravated by characteristic inadequate birth registration and poor record keeping habits. The
cost could be a substantial reduction in effective sample size impacting adversely on the accuracy of estimates of
child outcomes that require an accurate recollection of dates of birth of the child and of landmarks in child history
e.g. weaning, breastfeeding food supplementation, vaccination, pre-school development. Good recollection of dates
of events is also a vital requirement for quality of results on mortality rates.
Large Over-Age Children in Pre-School and Primary Schools
There are large numbers of household members’ age 8+ attending pre-school, similar unexpected numbers of
household members at quite unexpected ages are attending other levels of schools including the primary . If these
are confirmed as errors, then they probably suggest incorrect trend and a misrepresentation of pre-school
development and primary school attendance; it means an under-estimation of primary school attendance ratio and a
general loss of accuracy in the results
On the other hand, it is evident that there is a strong diagonal feature if we take the ages in groups e.g. 5-7, 6-8, etc.,
this suggests there could be some late starts in primary school enrolment, a feature that splits over into the higher
grades of the primary school and beyond.
Large Male-Female Ratio
Sex ratios at birth are consistently above the expected 1.05-1.06 level (Tables DQ.1 & DQ.9 and Figures DQ.4-
DQ.5) This usually indicates that some female children are not declared. This criticism suggests possible undersampling
of the female and in its wake an under-representation of the female children; it would also suggest a tilt to
male sex domination beyond the norm.
Under-declaration of female children necessarily distorts sex ratio figure and gender balance; an under-sampling of
the girl-children reduces the sample size and the precision of estimate of girl-child outcomes. It could also affect
estimates of sex differentials.
Large Exclusion o Children in the Calculation of Anthropometrical Child Outcomes
A large number of children are excluded from the tabulations on malnourishment, because of missing data (Table
DQ.5) Some 29 percent of all children under 5 are excluded from the analysis. This figure includes 11 percent who
were excluded because the weight and/or height measurements were out of range, and 17 percent for who date of
birth was incomplete; the exclusions were 17% due to missing date or year of birth and other causes. The missing
cases could as well be children of the most poorly educated mothers or children in the poorest wealth index
quintiles. Hence malnutrition could be more prevalent and more intense among them. In effect, the true state of
malnutrition in the country could be more serious than depicted by the data
Heaping of height and weight measurements
Considerable heaping of height and weight measurements around decimal point 0 and 0.5 most especially around 0
has been observed. Apparently figures ending 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 were rounded down to next whole number below.
Figures ending 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.8 were rounded
up to the whole number above while figures ending 0.5 were left alone because canvassers would not know whether
to round up or down (Figures 8a 8b). The errors here could mutually cancel out; the mean and the standard deviation
may not be significantly distorted, and the bias minimal. But if the individual measurement is considered against an
interval to decide the level of malnourishment of the individual child, then the effect of the difference of
magnitude 0.1 to 0.4 arising from rounding up or down of the individual measurement may be more than trivial
The extent of distortions associated with the tabulated results would depend on the extent to which differences of 0.1
to 0.4 in measurements of individual weight and height respectively influence the placement of an individual on the
weight for age (underweight), height for age (stunting) and weight for height (wasting) scales respectively. Weights
are measured in kg and height in cm; it is unlikely that differences of magnitude 0.1 – 0.4 cm in height and 0.1-0.4
kg in weight would make any significant difference in these placements.
Low Child Mortality Rates
Estimates of infant and under-5 mortality rates by MICS Nigeria 2007 are low.. Some inconsistency,
incomparability and incompatibility with previous survey results is suspected. Criticism that the figures are underestimates,
if well-founded means that child deaths have been under reported, or age structures of the children and of
the ,others have been misreported or that the calculating method is sensitive to such misreporting.
Name | URL | |
---|---|---|
National Bureau of Statistics | http://www.nigerianstat.gov.ng | feedback@nigerianstat.gov.ng |
Is signing of a confidentiality declaration required? | Confidentiality declaration text |
---|---|
yes | The confidentiality of the individual respondent is protected by law (Statistical Act 2007) This is published in the Official Gazette of the Federal republic of Nigeria No. 60 vol. 94 of 11th June 2007. See section 26 para.2. Punitive measures for breeches of confidentiality are outlined in section 28 of the same Act. |
A comprehensive data access policy is been developed by NBS, however section 27 of the Statistical Act 2007outlines the data access obligation of data producers which includes the realease of properly anonymized micro data.
"National Bureau of Statistics, Multiple Indicators Cluster Survey (MICS3, Nigeria 2006), version 1.2"
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.
(c)NBS 2007
Name | Affiliation | URL | |
---|---|---|---|
G.O Adewoye | Director Census & Surveys | goadewoye@nigerianstat.gov.ng | http://www.nigerianstat.gov.ng |
Mrs A.N. Adewimbi | Head of Information and Comnucation Technology Department | taadewnmbi@nigerianstat.gov.ng | http://www.nigerianstat.gov.ng |
Biyi Fafunmi | Data Curator | biyifafunmi@nigerianstat.gov.ng | http://www.nigerianstat.gov.ng |
Mrs A. A. Akinsanya | Data Archivist | paakinsanya@nigerianstat.gov.ng | http://www.nigerianstat.gov.ng |
National Bureau of Statistics | feedback@nigerianstat.gov.ng | http://www.nigerianstat.gov.ng |
DDI-NGR-NBS-MICS3 2007-v1.2
Name | Abbreviation | Affiliation | Role |
---|---|---|---|
National Bureau of Statistics | NBS | Federal Republic of Nigeria | Data Producers |
2008-08-26
Version 1.2