NBS Website | Register | Login
Login
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STATISTICS
An Online Microdata Catalog
  • Home
  • Microdata Catalog
  • Contact
    Home / Central Data Catalog / NGA-NBS-MICS3 2007-V1.2
central

Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey MICS3 (2007), Nigeria
Third round

Nigeria, 2007
Get Microdata
Reference ID
NGA-NBS-MICS3 2007-v1.2
Producer(s)
National Bureau of Statistics [nbs]
Metadata
DDI/XML JSON
Created on
Oct 18, 2010
Last modified
Dec 02, 2013
Page views
681275
Downloads
38221
  • Study Description
  • Data Dictionary
  • Downloads
  • Get Microdata
  • Identification
  • Version
  • Scope
  • Coverage
  • Producers and sponsors
  • Sampling
  • Survey instrument
  • Data collection
  • Data processing
  • Data appraisal
  • Data Access
  • Disclaimer and copyrights
  • Contacts
  • Metadata production
  • Identification

    Survey ID number

    NGA-NBS-MICS3 2007-v1.2

    Title

    Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey MICS3 (2007), Nigeria

    Subtitle

    Third round

    Abbreviation or Acronym

    MICS3, NIGERIA 2007

    Translated Title

    English

    Country
    Name Country code
    Nigeria NGA
    Study type

    Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey - Round 3 [hh/mics-3]

    Series Information

    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.

    Abstract

    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.

    Kind of Data

    Sample survey data [ssd]

    Unit of Analysis

    Individual, Household

    Version

    Version Description

    version 1.2

    Version Date

    2008-08-26

    Version Notes

    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

    • Under Education variable was corrected when missing, the program used is also attached under program file in the external resources
      -The Urban and Rural classfication were corrected

    Scope

    Notes

    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

    Topics
    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
    Keywords
    Total number of father Total number of women 15-49 Total number of children 5-17 Total number of children under 5-17 Ever attended school Highest level of school attended Medical support Hours worked Main source of drinking water Treat water to make safer for drinking Kind of toilet facility Religion Mother tongue Cooking location Mobile phone Car or truck Sons living with you Daughters living with you Sons living not with you Daughters not living with you Has immunization card Antenatal care Tested for hiv/aids Place of delivery Child weighed at birth Ever breastfeed Avoid pregnancy Ever circumcised Condom Nets

    Coverage

    Geographic Coverage

    National Zone State Local government Sector (Urban,Rural)

    Universe

    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.

    Producers and sponsors

    Primary investigators
    Name Affiliation
    National Bureau of Statistics [nbs] Federal Government of Nigeria
    Producers
    Name Affiliation Role
    United Nation Children Educational Fund UNICEF, Nigeria Funding & Technical assistance in Stakeholders meetings, monitoring
    Funding Agency/Sponsor
    Name Abbreviation Role
    Fedral Government of Nigeria FG Funding
    United Nation Children Educational Fund UNICEF Funding
    National Bureau of Statistics NBS Funding
    Other Identifications/Acknowledgments
    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

    Sampling

    Sampling Procedure

    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.

    Deviations from the Sample Design

    There were no deviation from sample Designed

    Response Rate

    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

    Weighting

    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.

    Survey instrument

    Questionnaires

    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.

    Methodology notes

    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

    Data collection

    Dates of Data Collection
    Start End Cycle
    2007-03 2007-04 30 Days
    Time periods
    Start date End date Cycle
    2007-03 2007-04 30 Days
    Mode of data collection
    • Face-to-face [f2f]
    Data Collectors
    Name Affiliation Abbreviation
    National Bureau of Statistics Federal Republic of Nigeria NBS
    Supervision

    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.

    Data Collection Notes

    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:

    • Survey design and roles of survey personnel
    • Classroom sessions on questionnaires and manuals
    • Mock interviews and role playing
    • Questionnaire editing
    • Field Practice

    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 processing

    Data Editing

    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

    Data appraisal

    Estimates of Sampling Error

    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

    Data Appraisal

    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.

    Data Access

    Access authority
    Name URL Email
    National Bureau of Statistics http://www.nigerianstat.gov.ng feedback@nigerianstat.gov.ng
    Confidentiality
    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.
    Access conditions

    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.

    Citation requirements

    "National Bureau of Statistics, Multiple Indicators Cluster Survey (MICS3, Nigeria 2006), version 1.2"

    Disclaimer and copyrights

    Disclaimer

    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.

    Copyright

    (c)NBS 2007

    Contacts

    Contacts
    Name Affiliation Email 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

    Metadata production

    DDI Document ID

    DDI-NGR-NBS-MICS3 2007-v1.2

    Producers
    Name Affiliation Role
    National Bureau of Statistics Federal Republic of Nigeria Data Producers
    Date of Metadata Production

    2008-08-26

    Metadata version

    DDI Document version

    Version 1.2

    Back to Catalog
    National Bureau of Statistics | Microdata Catalog

    © National Bureau of Statistics | Microdata Catalog, All Rights Reserved.