Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2000
Azerbaijan, 2000
Get MicrodataIdentification
AZE_2000_MICS_v01_M
Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2000
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| Azerbaijan | AZE |
Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey - Round 2 [hh/mics-2]
In 1998, UNICEF embarked on a process of helping countries assess progress for children at end-decade in relation to the World Summit for Children goals (New York, 1990).
Indicators
The list of global indicators being used to assess progress at end-decade was developed through extensive consultation, both within UNICEF, particularly with Programme Division and the Regional Offices, and with WHO, UNESCO and the ILO. The global indicator list can be found in Annex 1 of the Executive Directive EXD/1999-03 dated 23 April 1999.
Mid decade experience
There are numerous sources of data for measuring progress at country level, but many either do not function well enough to give current and quality data, or do not provide the data required for assessing progress. Household surveys are capable of filling many of these data gaps. The mid-decade assessment led to 100 countries collecting data using the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS), household surveys developed to obtain specific mid-decade data, or via MICS questionnaire modules carried by other surveys. By 1996, 60 developing countries had carried out stand-alone MICS, and another 40 had incorporated some of the MICS modules into other surveys. The mid-decade questionnaire and manual, the countries where a standalone MICS was implemented.
The end-decade assessment
The end-decade MICS questionnaire and manual have been developed specifically to obtain the data for 63 of the 75 end-decade indicators. These draw heavily on experiences with the mid-decade MICS and the subsequent MICS evaluation. The content is organized into question modules, for countries to adopt or omit according to the data already available. The development of the end-decade MICS questionnaire and manual has drawn on an even wider spread of organizations than the mid-decade MICS. They include WHO, UNESCO, ILO, UNAIDS, the United Nations Statistical Division, CDC Atlanta, MEASURE (USAID), Johns Hopkins University, Columbia University, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and others.
The 2000 Azerbaijan Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) is a nationally representative survey of households, women, and children. The main objectives of the survey are to provide up-to-date information for assessing the situation of children and women in Azerbaijan at the end of the decade and to furnish data needed for monitoring progress toward goals established at the World Summit for Children and as a basis for future action.
Sample survey data [ssd]
- Households
- Individuals
- Women age 15-49
- Children under age 5
Version
Data downloaded from MICS2 website (www.childinfo.org) on May 24, 2011
Scope
The Azerbaijan Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS 2) covered the following topics:
HOUSEHOLD
- Household demographic characteristics
- Education
- Child labor
- Water and sanitation
- Maternal mortality
- Salt iodization
WOMEN
- Child mortality
- Tetanus toxoid
- Maternal and newborn health
- Contraceptive use
- HIV/AIDS
CHILDREN UNDER AGE 5
- Birth registration and early learning
- Vitamin A
- Vitamin D
- Breastfeeding
- Care of Illness
- Respiratory illness
- Immunization
- Anthropometry
Coverage
The 2000 Azerbaijan Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) is a nationally representative survey of households, women, and children.
Producers and sponsors
| Name |
|---|
| State Statistical Committee |
| Name | Role |
|---|---|
| United Nations Children's Fund | Design of Survey and Technical Support |
| Name | Role |
|---|---|
| United Nations Children's Fund | Financial support |
Sampling
The sample for the Azerbaijan Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) was designed as a self-weighted sample to provide estimates of World Summit indicators at the national level and for urban and rural areas. The enumeration areas and the households from the Population Census of 1999 formed the sample frame. An enumeration area comprised about 507 persons on the average. It was thus possible to use enumeration areas directly as primary sampling units (PSUs) for first stage selection. The total sample size for the Azerbaijan MICS was calculated as 6112 households. The average cluster size was determined as 24 households and 254 clusters were selected.
The sample was selected in two stages. At the first stage, the 254 clusters were distributed to three domains (the Baku area, other urban areas and rural areas) proportionately according to their size. The enumeration areas in each of the three domains were geographically sorted using the nine zones designated during the Soviet era but still in use in the country, albeit in a more limited fashion. Enumeration areas were selected with probability proportional to size, separately from the three domains. The household lists were updated in each selected enumeration area by using several computerized lists originating from the census, as well as the actual household questionnaires from the census, for the primary reason of including IDP/refugee households in the sample. During the second selection stage, households were systematically selected using a fixed sampling interval. A total of 6166 households were selected. The difference between the number of households selected and the target number of households is attributed to rounding during the selection procedures and the presence of multiple households in the selected households.
Note: See detailed sample design description in APPENDIX A of the report which is presented in this documentation.
Of the 6166 households selected for the Azerbaijan MICS sample, 6044 were found to be occupied (Table 1). Of these, 5861 were successfully interviewed for a household response rate of 97 percent. The response rate was similar in urban and rural areas. In the interviewed households, 7488 eligible women aged 15-49 were identified. Of these, 6959 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 93 percent. In addition, 2004 children under age five were listed in the household questionnaire. Of these, questionnaires were completed for 1875 children for a response rate of 94 percent.
Note: See summarized response rates in Table 1 of the report which is presented this documentation.
Survey instrument
The questionnaires for the Azerbaijan MICS were based on the MICS Model Questionnaire with some modifications, additions, and deletions. A household questionnaire was administered in each household, which collected information on household members including sex, age, literacy, marital status, and orphanhood status. The household questionnaire also includes education, child labor, water and sanitation, maternal mortality, and salt iodisation modules, as well as several questions on household amenities. In addition to a household questionnaire, questionnaires were administered in each household for women age 15-49 and children under age five.For children, the questionnaire was administered to the mother or caretaker of the child.
The questionnaire for women contains the following modules:
- Child mortality
- Maternal and newborn health
- Contraceptive use
- HIV/AIDS
The questionnaire for children under age five includes modules on:
- Birth registration and early learning
- Breastfeeding
- Care of Illness
- Malaria
- Immunization
- Anthropometry
From the MICS model English version, the questionnaires were translated into two languages: Azeri and Russian. The questionnaires were pre-tested during June 2000. Based on the results of the pretest, modifications were made to the wording and codes of questions.
Data collection
| Start | End |
|---|---|
| 2000-08-01 | 2000-08-29 |
The field staff was trained in two stages. During 7 days in June 2000 a group of 17 interviewers were trained, to take part as interviewers in the pretest and to participate in the main training and fieldwork as trainers, regional coordinators, supervisors and editors. The main training was carried out in July during a six day long training session. A total of 67 individuals were trained during the main training session, and a two-day pilot study was conducted upon the completion of training. In the main fieldwork, ten teams collected the data. Each team comprised three interviewers, one editor, one supervisor and one driver. Two regional coordinators provided constant monitoring of the fieldwork. The MICS Coordinator provided overall supervision. The fieldwork began on 1 August 2000 and concluded on 29 August 2000.
Data processing
Data were entered on fifteen microcomputers using the ISSA software. Appropriate changes to the initial software were made in accordance with the modifications in the Azerbaijan MICS questionnaire. In order to ensure quality control, all questionnaires were double entered and internal consistency checks were performed. Procedures and standard programs developed under MICS and adapted to the Azerbaijan questionnaire were used throughout. Data processing began on 7 August 2000 and finished on 20 September 2000.
Data appraisal
The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: non-sampling and sampling errors. Nonsampling errors result from mistakes made in implementing data collection and data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the questions on the part of either the interviewers or the respondents, and data entry errors.
Non-sampling errors are generally impossible to avoid and difficult to detect and evaluate statistically.
Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sampling error is a measure of the variability between all possible samples from the same universe. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can be estimated from the survey results.
Sampling error is usually measured in terms of standard error for a particular statistic (mean, percentage etc) which is the ratio of the standard deviation to the square root of the sample size. The standard error can be used to calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will fall within a range of plus or minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all possible samples of identical sample and design.
If the MICS sample had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been possible to use straightforward formulae for calculating sampling errors. However, the MICS sample is a multi-stage cluster design, and there is need for use of more complex formulae. The computer package, CLUSTERS, was therefore used to compute sampling errors for selected variables with the proper statistical methodology. In addition to the standard errors, CLUSTERS computes the design effect (DEFT) for each estimate, which is defined as the ratio of the standard error using the given sample design to the standard error that would result if a simple random sample had been used. A DEFT value of 1.0 indicates that the sample design is as efficient as a simple random sample, whereas a DEFT value greater than 1.0 indicates the increase in the sampling error due to the use of a more complex and less statistically efficient design. CLUSTERS also computes the relative error and confidence limits for the estimates.
The results for selected variables are presented here for Azerbaijan as a whole, for urban and rural areas, and for the five regions. Note that all variables are in the form of proportions.
The confidence interval can be interpreted as follows: As an example, the overall proportion of women who have ever given birth from the national sample is 0.622 (see variable EVERBR in Table A.2), and the standard error is 0.007. Therefore, to obtain the 95 percent confidence limits, one adds and subtracts twice the standard error to the sample estimate. There is a high probability (95 percent) that the true proportion of women who have ever given birth is between 0.608 and 0.636.
Note: See detailed in Table A.1 - Table A.9 which are presented in the report.
Data Quality Table
Table 2: Percentage of Cases Missing Information for Selected Questions, Azerbaijan, 2000
Note: See content of Table 2 in the report which is provided in this documentation.
Data Access
Dataset available free of charge to registered users (www.childinfo.org).
MICS2 has put greater efforts in not only properly documenting the results published in the MICS2 country reports, but also to maximize the use of micro data sets via documentation and dissemination. For those MICS2 countries that granted UNICEF direct access to the micro data sets and documentation, a rigorous process was completed to ensure internal and external consistency, basic standards of data quality, corresponding documentation and, standardization of variable and value labels across countries.
Use of the dataset must be acknowledged using a citation which would include:
- the Identification of the Primary Investigator
- the title of the survey (including country, acronym and year of implementation)
- the survey reference number
- the source and date of download of the data files (for datasets obtained on-line)
Disclaimer and copyrights
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.
Contacts
| Name | Affiliation | URL | |
|---|---|---|---|
| General Inquiries | UNICEF | childinfo@unicef.org | http://www.childinfo.org/ |
| MICS Programme Manager | UNICEF | mics@unicef.org | http://www.childinfo.org/ |
Metadata production
DDI_WB_AZE_2000_MICS_v01_M
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Development Economics Data Group | World Bank | Documentation of the DDI |
2011-06-02
Metadata version
Version 1.0 - Prepared by IHSN/World Bank Microdata Library