Other forms of Data Appraisal
Quality Assurance: With a projected housing units interviews of 77,400 and the deployment of fieldstaff of over 520 enumerators and 142 supervisors, spread across the 36 states of the Federation and FCT, Abuja, one of the main challenges of the survey was how to manage the non-sampling errors that were likely to occur in such a hugs exercise. The challenge was met through (i) carefully planned recruitment and selection of high quality and competent field staff (ii) elaborate, intensive and effective training of field staff (iii) close and effective supervision and monitoring of fieldwork (iv) fortnightly review of fieldwork with the state officers (v) good control of data entry and processing. Coordination of Fieldwork: The survey took advantage of one of NBS infrastructures for survey taking, namely, the network of field offices. Under its zonal arrangement, a number of states were grouped together to constitute a zone. Presently, NBS operates six zones. Each zone is headed by a Zonal Controller who, amongst other responsibilities, coordinates field operations within the zone. The state officers take responsibility for fieldwork in their respective states. Thus, for the CWIQ survey, while the state officers were made to coordinate fieldwork in their respective states, the zonal controllers, on the other hand, were charged with the responsibilities of monitoring and coordinating fieldwork in their respective zones. Specifically, the state officers were responsible for the sensitization of the LG chairpersons and community leaders. They coordinated fieldwork, coordinated retrieval of records, took custody of and ensured proper distribution of survey materials/equipment, provided logistic support for fieldwork, collected and paid field staff allowances and generally, attended to other related issues encountered by their teams. Monitoring of Fieldwork: The fieldwork was monitored at several levels. At the outset of fieldwork, some of the NBS headquarters staff who conducted training at the 2nd level stayed on and monitored data quality during the first week of the fieldwork i.e. the week immediately after the training. Thereafter, the state officers assumed full responsibility for the quality of fieldwork in their respective states. Within each state, a monitoring team was constituted. The teams of supervisors and enumerators were shared between members of the monitoring team. Each monitoring officer was responsible for data quality in the assigned team(s). Amongst others, they made field visits to the team(s) to control data quality, received completed questionnaires and subjected them to further review before submitting satisfactorily completed questionnaires to the state coordinator. The Zonal Controllers monitored the quality of fieldwork within their respective zones. They ensured that all the states within their zones were visited at least once before the end of the fieldwork. A monitoring programme was packaged to serve as guidelines for all the three different layers of monitoring officers. The Independent Monitors appointed by the WB also monitored the fieldwork throughout the states. Their comments and observations were directed towards the collection of good quality data.
|
Digg
Google Buzz
LinkedIn
Stumbleupon
Delicious
