Quality requirements and standard quality report
ANNEX IIISupplementary provisions
ANNEX III Quality requirements and standard quality report A standard quality report shall be submitted in accordance with the European Statistical System Standard Quality Report Structure. Particular attention shall be given to relevance, accuracy, timeliness and punctuality, accessibility and clarity, comparability and coherence in accordance with Article 4(1)(d) of Regulation (EC) No 452/2008. Member States shall submit a standard quality report as defined in Article 6 of this Regulation. They shall do so using the transmission formats the Commission (Eurostat) provides. A copy of the national questionnaire shall accompany the report. The standard quality criteria shall be applied as follows. 1. RELEVANCE — Implementation of the survey and the degree to which statistics meet current and potential users' needs. — Description and classification of users. — Individual needs of each user group. — Whether and to what degree those needs have been met. 2. ACCURACY 2.1. Sampling errors — Description of the sample design and the actual sample. — Description of the calculation of the final weighting factors including the non-response model and auxiliary variables used. — Coefficients of variation of the estimates according to the sample strata with regard to the indicators of interest listed in Annex II, point 3. — Variance estimation software. — A description of the auxiliary variables or information used. — With regard to non-response analysis, a description of the biases in the sample and the results. 2.2. Non-sampling errors 2.2.1. Coverage errors — Description of the register used for sampling and its overall quality. — Information included in the register and its updating frequency. — Errors due to the discrepancies between the sampling frame and the target population and sub-populations (over-coverage, under-coverage, misclassifications). — Methods used to obtain this information. — Notes on the processing of misclassifications. 2.2.2. Measurement errors Assessment of errors that occurred at the data collection stage, due for example to: — The questionnaire design (results of pre-tests or laboratory methods; questioning strategies). — Reporting unit/respondent (respondents' reactions). — Data collection tools and the use of administrative records (correspondence between the administrative and the survey concepts, e.g. the reference period, the availability of individual data). — Data collection modes. 2.2.3. Processing errors Description of the data editing process: — Processing system and tools used. — Errors due to coding, editing, weighting and tabulation, etc. — Quality checks at macro-/micro-level. — Breakdown of corrections and of failed edits into missing values, errors and anomalies. 2.2.4. Non-response errors Description of the measures taken to contact respondents again: — Unit and item response rates. — Assessment of unit non-response and item non-response. — Full report on imputation procedures including the methods used for imputation and/or re-weighting. — Methodological notes and the results of non-response analysis or other methods to assess the effects of non-response. 3. TIMELINESS AND PUNCTUALITY Table of dates showing when each of the following phases of the project started and ended: data collection, reminders and follow-up, checking and editing data, further validation and imputation, non-response survey (as appropriate), estimations, data transmission to Eurostat and the dissemination of national results. 4. ACCESSIBILITY AND CLARITY — Conditions of access to data. — Plan for disseminating the results. — A copy of any methodological documents relating to the statistics provided. 5. COMPARABILITY As appropriate and relevant, countries should comment on: — Deviations from the European questionnaire and definitions. — Whether the survey was linked to another national survey. — To what extent the survey was done using existing data in registers. — A description of how the requirements of this Regulation have been fulfilled so the comparability of the data can be assessed. 6. COHERENCE — Comparison of statistics for the same phenomenon or item from other surveys or sources. — Description of how the requirements of this Regulation have been fulfilled so the geographical comparability of the data can be assessed. 7. COST AND BURDEN Analysis of the burden and benefit at national level by considering the following for example: — Average time for answering the questionnaire. — Problematic questions or modules from the survey. — Problems with the classification and definition of learning activities, problems with other classifications. — The variables which were most/least useful in collecting data on adult participation in lifelong learning. — Estimated or actual satisfaction level of national data users. — Respondent burden. Efforts made to reduce burden.