Kenya - Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2013-2014, Bungoma County
Reference ID | ken-mics-bc-2013-2014-v1 |
Year | 2013 - 2014 |
Country | Kenya |
Producer(s) |
Kenya National Bureau of Statistics - Government of Kenya Population Studies and Research Institute - University of Nairobi |
Sponsor(s) | United Nations Children’s Fund - - Financial and technical support |
Collection(s) |
Created on
Nov 22, 2017
Last modified
Nov 22, 2017
Page views
47077
Sampling
Sampling Procedure
The primary objective of the sample design for the Bungoma County MICS was to produce statistically reliable estimates of indicators, at county level. The urban and rural areas in Bungoma County were the sampling strata. A multi-stage, stratified cluster sampling approach was used for the selection of the survey sample.
MICS5 utilized the recently created fifth National Sample Survey and Evaluation Program (NASSEP V) frame which is a household based master sampling frame developed and maintained by KNBS. The frame was implemented using a multi-tiered structure, in which a set of 4 sub-samples (C1, C2, C3, C4) were developed. It is based on the list of enumeration areas (EAs) from the 2009 Kenya Population and Housing Census. The frame is stratified according to County and further into rural and urban. Each of the sub-samples is representative at county level and at national (i.e. Urban/rural) level and contains 1,340 clusters.
The Primary Sampling Units (PSUs) for the survey were clusters drawn from the NASSEP V sampling frame, so the first component of the probabilities and weights are based on that master sample. Within each stratum the PSUs for the MICS were selected independently from one of the subsamples of the master sample using Equal Probability Selection Method (EPSEM). A total of 50 clusters were selected from the master sample in this way.
Out of the 50 sample clusters selected for Bungoma County, it was established that 30 had been listed more than six months prior to the start of the survey. These listing for these clusters was updated prior to selection of households. For this purpose, listing teams visited each cluster, and listed all occupied households. For the remaining 20 sample clusters a more recent listing was available, so it was used for selecting the sample households.
Response Rate
Information was collected from a total of 1,246 households representing 95 percent response rate. The composition of these households was 5,983 household members comprising 2,797 males and 3,186 females. The mean household size was 4.8 persons. About 48 percent of the sampled households' population is below 15 years, 48 percent are between age 15-64 years and four percent are age 65 years and above.
Due to data quality issues, data relating to mortality and anthropometric measures were not analyzed and reported. Anthropometric data suffered digit preference for both weight and height, while for mortality, deaths especially among children under-five years were under reported. KDHS 2014 had similar shortcomings.
Weighting
The MICS5 sample was not self-weighting and thus a weighting process was required to provide estimates representative of the target population. Two main sampling weights were calculated: household weights and individual (women and children) weights. The base weights incorporated the probabilities of selection of the clusters from the census EAs database into the NASSEP V sample frame, the probabilities of selection of the MICS clusters from NASSEP V frame and the probabilities of selection of the households from each of the NASSEP V frame clusters.
Base weights were then adjusted for cluster and household non-response by multiplying them by the inverse of the clusters and households response rates. The individual weight of a woman or child was calculated as the household weight multiplied by the inverse of the individual response rate. Given that the MICS5 sample was a two-stage stratified cluster sample, sampling probabilities were calculated separately for each sampling stage.