Methodological Preparations for an Irish Post Census

National Disability Survey in 2006

Paper for Washington Group on Disability Statistics5th Meeting Rio de Janeiro, September 2005

Gerry Brady (CSO) and Anne Good (NDA)

Context

• UN Standard Rules, 1993

• Report of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities, 1996

• NDA Act, 1999

The UN Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities  

Rule 13. Information and Research

  “States should, at regular intervals, collect gender-specific statistics and other information concerning the living conditions of persons with disabilities.

Such data collection could be conducted in conjunction with national censuses and household surveys …

The data collection should include questions on programmes and services and their use.  ”

Strategy for Equality 1996

‘The Central Statistics Office should

carry out a survey of the extent of

disabilities in Ireland, and establish a

system to ensure that relevant data is

regularly updated.’

(Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities, 1996:8)

NDA Act 1999: Research for evidence-based change

“..to undertake, commission or collaborate in research projects …

“… to assist in the development of statistical information appropropriate for planning, delivery and monitoring of programmes and services for persons with disability

Review 2002: lack of data on disability in Republic of Ireland

Statistical Research

Mainstream administrative databases

Disability Databases:

Physical/Sensory

Intellectual

National Surveys

Census

QNHS

Proposed Irish National Disability Study

Methodological Preparations

The NDA Pilot Disability Survey and Consultation Exercise, 2002-2004

Census of Population 2002Census of Population 2006Post survey micro data linkage to 2006 Census fileNDS 2006 sampleNDS 2006 questionnaire Ethical practice in disability surveys.

1.      The NDA Pilot Disability Survey and

Consultation Exercise, 2002-2004

• Questionnaires developed and tested (ICF framework)

• Consultations conducted with stakeholders

• Pilot process reviewed

• Interviewer guidelines developed

• NDS recommended to government

2. and 3.    

Census of Population 2002

Census of Population 2006;

Census 2002

First time disability questions included in census, rate 8.3%

Census 2006

Disability questions revised and piloted in 2004, rate 10.6%

4.      Post survey micro data linkage to 2006 Census file

Each person recorded in the Census can be uniquely identified electronically by a combination of four variables:

 County code;Enumeration area code (EA)D number (taken from the Enumerator Record Book which is a list of all households within an EA including their addresses); andPerson number on the census form.

5.      NDS 2006 sample: broad issues decided

1. Include children and adults of all ages whether living in private households or in communal establishments. Homeless people will not be covered;

2.   The total sample size will be around 15,000 persons. This includes around 2,000 persons who did not report a disability in the Census; 

3.      The primary sampling unit will be the Electoral Division. These will be selected using the disability results from the 2002 Census of Population. 

4.      The secondary sampling unit will be a named person  

5.    The data gathered during the 2006 Census will be used to stratify and select. A higher proportion of younger persons with a disability will be included.

6.      NDS 2006 Questionnaire

Pilot questionnaires the starting point

Another broad consultation exercise, emphasis on government departments

Many questions reworded/modified (especially re mental health)

More prominence given to built environment and transport

Major life areas eg education, employment expanded

7.      Ethical practice in disability surveys.

Core values to underpin disability research:

• Respect for the human rights, dignity, equality and diversity;• Advancement of social justice for people with disabilities;• Promotion of the well-being of those participating, involved in or affected

by the research process;• Avoidance of harm to those involved in the research process or to the wider

community;• Facilitation of the participation of people with disabilities in research and

research dissemination;• Maintenance of the highest professional, legal and ethical standards and

competencies; and• Comprehension and fulfilment of relevant legal responsibilities.

Conclusions

1. The work undertaken by the NDA in commissioning a pilot disability survey was pivotal  

2. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform provided the next major impetus by bringing a Memorandum to Government. 

3. The work on disability statistics undertaken by the CSO 2002-2005 laid a good foundation for deciding practical issues such as sample selection and methodology.

4. The work of the ICF and the Washington City Group has resulted in more international based consistency in the definition of disability..

5. There remain unresolved issues around determining a country’s disability prevalence rate.  

6. It is hoped to use the PPSN collected in the NDS to examine other administrative databases from a disability perspective..