Surveys Completed to Date | |||||
Municipality | Total Surveys | Recontact Rate | Avg Duration (Min) | N Enumerators | % Female Respondents |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Kampong Cham | 804 | 66% | 35.55 | 18 | 65.67 |
Siem Reap | 2852 | 73% | 40.05 | 17 | 66.41 |
Stung Saen | 1138 | 91% | 33.96 | 7 | 70.91 |
Total | 4794 | 76% | 37.85 | 37 | 67.36 |
There are 305 HHs from baseline which still need to be surveyed or replaced.
Remaining Households to be Surveyed or Replaced | |||
Municipality | Total HHs | Total Surveyed | Total Remaining |
---|---|---|---|
Kampong Cham | 934 | 788 | 146 |
Siem Reap | 2879 | 2815 | 64 |
Stung Saen | 1199 | 1104 | 95 |
Surveys Completed on August 30 | ||||
Municipality | Total Surveys | Recontact Rate | Avg Duration | N Enumerators |
---|---|---|---|---|
Kampong Cham | 31 | 68% | 34.82 | 7 |
Siem Reap | 37 | 65% | 35.58 | 9 |
Stung Saen | 14 | 64% | 28.98 | 3 |
Total | 82 | 66% | 34.16 | 19 |
Enumerator Summary: Surveys Completed on August 30 | |||||
Enumerator | Municipality | N Surveys | Recontact Rate | Avg Duration | Under 30 min |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tong Vanndy | Siem Reap | 4 | 100% | 25.49 | 3 |
Yiem Nim | Stung Saen | 4 | 75% | 25.57 | 4 |
Kheng SreyToch | Stung Saen | 5 | 60% | 29.75 | 3 |
Ret Doun | Kampong Cham | 5 | 40% | 29.82 | 2 |
Sreang Kimheng | Kampong Cham | 5 | 80% | 30.57 | 3 |
Khut Sambo | Stung Saen | 5 | 60% | 30.93 | 2 |
Sales Mouseu | Kampong Cham | 4 | 100% | 31.02 | 1 |
Pek Kea | Siem Reap | 5 | 80% | 34.32 | 1 |
Un Chhuy | Siem Reap | 6 | 50% | 34.49 | 0 |
Huom sayan | Siem Reap | 5 | 60% | 34.82 | 0 |
Kheat Phun | Siem Reap | 6 | 67% | 35.24 | 0 |
Ly Hengtry | Siem Reap | 2 | 50% | 36.82 | 1 |
Suon Savoeun | Kampong Cham | 5 | 80% | 37.42 | 0 |
Em Sambath | Kampong Cham | 4 | 25% | 37.7 | 0 |
Sang Phally | Siem Reap | 1 | 0% | 38.58 | 0 |
Hieng Samnang | Kampong Cham | 4 | 50% | 39.11 | 0 |
Chay Thona | Kampong Cham | 4 | 100% | 39.78 | 1 |
Ren Borath | Siem Reap | 2 | 50% | 40.47 | 0 |
Pay Danech | Siem Reap | 6 | 67% | 42.84 | 0 |
Enumerators listed in order of shortest average duration. |
List Experiment Diagnostics by Enumerator: August 30 | |||||
Enumerator | Municipality | N Surveys | N Zero Responses | Avg Time (Min) | Shortest Time (Min) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tong Vanndy | Siem Reap | 4 | 4 | 0.38 | 0.05 |
Sang Phally | Siem Reap | 1 | 0 | 0.75 | 0.75 |
Khut Sambo | Stung Saen | 5 | 4 | 0.82 | 0.77 |
Kheat Phun | Siem Reap | 6 | 5 | 0.88 | 0.58 |
Yiem Nim | Stung Saen | 4 | 2 | 0.88 | 0.77 |
Pay Danech | Siem Reap | 6 | 4 | 0.91 | 0.85 |
Kheng SreyToch | Stung Saen | 5 | 5 | 0.93 | 0.77 |
Ret Doun | Kampong Cham | 5 | 5 | 0.98 | 0.75 |
Ren Borath | Siem Reap | 2 | 1 | 1.01 | 0.93 |
Un Chhuy | Siem Reap | 6 | 3 | 1.12 | 1.08 |
Pek Kea | Siem Reap | 5 | 3 | 1.16 | 0.92 |
Sreang Kimheng | Kampong Cham | 5 | 5 | 1.17 | 0.85 |
Hieng Samnang | Kampong Cham | 4 | 1 | 1.2 | 1.05 |
Chay Thona | Kampong Cham | 4 | 2 | 1.27 | 0.67 |
Huom sayan | Siem Reap | 5 | 4 | 1.34 | 1.13 |
Suon Savoeun | Kampong Cham | 5 | 4 | 1.53 | 1.03 |
Sales Mouseu | Kampong Cham | 4 | 3 | 1.55 | 1.1 |
Em Sambath | Kampong Cham | 4 | 2 | 1.71 | 1.52 |
Ly Hengtry | Siem Reap | 2 | 2 | 1.9 | 1.22 |
Enumerators listed in order of shortest average list experiment duration. |
Conjoint Diagnostics by Enumerator: August 30 | |||||
Enumerator | Municipality | Conjoint 1 | Conjoint 2 | Conjoint 3 | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tong Vanndy | Siem Reap | 0.59 | 0.23 | 0.18 | 1 |
Sang Phally | Siem Reap | 0.58 | 0.57 | 0.37 | 1.52 |
Yiem Nim | Stung Saen | 0.68 | 0.43 | 0.45 | 1.56 |
Sales Mouseu | Kampong Cham | 0.8 | 0.55 | 0.5 | 1.85 |
Chay Thona | Kampong Cham | 0.84 | 0.57 | 0.5 | 1.91 |
Ly Hengtry | Siem Reap | 1.23 | 0.29 | 0.49 | 2.01 |
Kheat Phun | Siem Reap | 0.96 | 0.49 | 0.57 | 2.02 |
Ren Borath | Siem Reap | 0.95 | 0.54 | 0.54 | 2.03 |
Sreang Kimheng | Kampong Cham | 1.1 | 0.53 | 0.41 | 2.04 |
Kheng SreyToch | Stung Saen | 0.91 | 0.61 | 0.54 | 2.06 |
Pay Danech | Siem Reap | 0.91 | 0.62 | 0.56 | 2.09 |
Hieng Samnang | Kampong Cham | 0.87 | 0.67 | 0.57 | 2.11 |
Un Chhuy | Siem Reap | 1.05 | 0.57 | 0.54 | 2.16 |
Em Sambath | Kampong Cham | 0.87 | 0.88 | 0.48 | 2.23 |
Suon Savoeun | Kampong Cham | 1.1 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 2.24 |
Ret Doun | Kampong Cham | 1.18 | 0.61 | 0.45 | 2.24 |
Pek Kea | Siem Reap | 0.87 | 0.72 | 0.81 | 2.4 |
Khut Sambo | Stung Saen | 1.11 | 0.56 | 0.77 | 2.44 |
Huom sayan | Siem Reap | 1.31 | 0.76 | 0.73 | 2.8 |
Enumerators listed in order of shortest average total conjoint duration. |
This table shows the average HHI, by enumerator, of the responses to 13 agreement-style questions in the survey. The HHI is a metric that indicates the ‘diversification’ in responses to the agreement questions. An average HHI of 1 indicates that the enumerator records the same answer for all 13 agreement questions on every survey they enumerated. As the average HHI approaches 0, it indicates that the enumerator tends to record the same number of responses at each level of agreement for each survey.
We consider average HHIs above 0.8 and below 0.3 (the smallest possible HHI in this case is 0.17) as potentially suspicious. Note that an HHI of 0.86 corresponds to 12 out of 13 answers being the same.
Variation in Response to Agreement Questions by Enumerator: August 30 | ||
Enumerator | N Surveys | Avg HHI |
---|---|---|
Huom sayan | 5 | 0.901 |
Ret Doun | 5 | 0.891 |
Kheng SreyToch | 5 | 0.785 |
Kheat Phun | 6 | 0.783 |
Un Chhuy | 6 | 0.781 |
Tong Vanndy | 4 | 0.695 |
Hieng Samnang | 4 | 0.66 |
Suon Savoeun | 5 | 0.647 |
Yiem Nim | 4 | 0.645 |
Khut Sambo | 5 | 0.612 |
Sales Mouseu | 4 | 0.574 |
Sang Phally | 1 | 0.574 |
Chay Thona | 4 | 0.538 |
Em Sambath | 4 | 0.521 |
Pek Kea | 5 | 0.503 |
Ly Hengtry | 2 | 0.497 |
Pay Danech | 6 | 0.487 |
Sreang Kimheng | 5 | 0.472 |
Ren Borath | 2 | 0.402 |
Enumerators listed in order of highest to lowest Average HHI. |
This table shows the basic summary stats for the most problematic enumerators today. Note that this table only includes an enumerator’s diagnostic if they were among the worst 5 enumerators today in terms of average duration, recontact rate, average list experiment duration, or average total conjoint time, or had an average HHI on the agreement questions of above 0.8 or below 0.3.
The column “Total number of issues” indicates how many of these five categories (duration, recontact, list experiment, conjoint, agreement questions) the enumerator was among the worst in.
Worst Performing Enumerators: August 30 | ||||||||||
Enumerator | Municipality | N Surveys | Avg Duration | Under 30 min | Recontact Rate (%) | N Zeros on LE | Avg Time on LE | Avg Total Time Conjoint | Avg HHI agreement | Total # of Issues |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tong Vanndy | Siem Reap | 4 | 25.49 | 3 | 4 | 0.38 | 1 | 3 | ||
Yiem Nim | Stung Saen | 4 | 25.57 | 4 | 2 | 0.88 | 1.56 | 3 | ||
Ret Doun | Kampong Cham | 5 | 29.82 | 2 | 40 | 0.891 | 3 | |||
Sang Phally | Siem Reap | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.75 | 1.52 | 3 | |||
Enumerators listed from worst to better performers on August 30 |
Question Text
We are interested in the sets of activities that you may take when you find the performance of your subnational officials to be disappointed.
I am going to read 4 statements that describe activities. Please tell me how many of these activities you took in the past 3 years. I don’t want to know about any specific item. I only want to know the total number of activities that you did.
Results
List Experiment Difference in Means: July 21 to August 30 | |||
Control | Treatment | T.Stat | p.value |
---|---|---|---|
0.437 | 0.559 | -5.289 | 0 |
In all surveys enumerated to date, we have the following issues with Unique IDs:
Up-to-date CSV files providing the details of surveys with Unique ID errors can be found here.