In 1998, UNICEF embarked on a process of helping countries assess progress for children at end-decade in relation to the World Summit for Children goals (New York, 1990).
The list of global indicators being used to assess progress at end-decade was developed through extensive consultation, both within UNICEF, particularly with Programme Division and the Regional Offices, and with WHO, UNESCO and the ILO. The global indicator list can be found in Annex 1 of the Executive Directive EXD/1999-03 dated 23 April 1999.
Mid decade experience
There are numerous sources of data for measuring progress at country level, but many either do not function well enough to give current and quality data, or do not provide the data required for assessing progress. Household surveys are capable of filling many of these data gaps. The mid-decade assessment led to 100 countries collecting data using the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS), household surveys developed to obtain specific mid-decade data, or via MICS questionnaire modules carried by other surveys. By 1996, 60 developing countries had carried out stand-alone MICS, and another 40 had incorporated some of the MICS modules into other surveys. The mid-decade questionnaire and manual, the countries where a standalone MICS was implemented.
The end-decade assessment
The end-decade MICS questionnaire and manual have been developed specifically to obtain the data for 63 of the 75 end-decade indicators. These draw heavily on experiences with the mid-decade MICS and the subsequent MICS evaluation. The content is organized into question modules, for countries to adopt or omit according to the data already available. The development of the end-decade MICS questionnaire and manual has drawn on an even wider spread of organizations than the mid-decade MICS. They include WHO, UNESCO, ILO, UNAIDS, the United Nations Statistical Division, CDC Atlanta, MEASURE (USAID), Johns Hopkins University, Columbia University, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and others.
The 1999 Zambia Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) was a nationally and provincially representative survey of households, women, and children. The main objectives of the survey were to provide up-to-date information for assessing the situation of children and women in Zambia at the end of the decade; and to furnish the necessary data for monitoring progress toward the goals established at the World Summit for Children. This data will form the basis for future action.
Kind of Data
Sample survey data [ssd]
Unit of Analysis
Household, Women, Child
Data downloaded from MICS2 website (www.childinfo.org) on May 24, 2011
The scope of the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2 includes:
- HOUSEHOLD: Household characteristics, Household listing, Education, Household Expenditure, Household Income, Labor Force, Child labour, Water and Sanitation, Salt iodization.
- WOMEN: Women's characteristics, Maternal care and tetanus toxoid, Contraception use, and HIV/AIDS .
- CHILDREN: Children's characteristics, Birth registration and Early learning, Vitamin A, Breastfeeding, Care of illness, Malaria, Immunization, and Anthropometry.
- The module on child labour was expanded to take into account the needs of the ILO child labour component.
The 1999 Zambia Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) was a nationally and provincially representative survey of households, women, and children.
Producers and sponsors
Central Statistical Office Labour Division
Food Security, Health and Nutrition Information System
United Nations Children's Fund
International Labour Organization
The Zambia MICS was designed to provide estimates of MICS indicators at the national level, for urban and rural areas, and for nine provinces. The two-stage stratified probability proportional to size (PPS) cluster sampling method was applied in Zambia’s MICS survey. Each province was an independent stratum. Each province is stratified by urban and rural strata. The first stage involved the selection of the primary sampling units (Standard Enumeration Areas, SEA) based on the probability proportional to size method in each district. The second stage was the selection of households within the sample SEAs. Three hundred sixty SEAs were selected from total 13,000 SEAs in Zambia. Twenty five households in urban areas and 20 households in rural areas were selected from each sampled SEA by the systematic sampling method. A total of 8,000 households was drawn. Sample weights are used for reporting national and provincial level results. The full technical details of the sample design are included in Appendix A.
In Zambia, 8,000 households were selected for the MICS sample. When a household refused to be interviewed or could not be found (non-contact), or dwelling could not be found or could not be interviewed due to some other problem, the household was replaced. The replacement was meant to improve the response rate. However, there were cases when even the replacement household could not be interviewed. In the end, a total of 7,915 households were successfully interviewed (see Table 1 of Appendix D) for a household response rate of 98.9 per cent. The response rate was higher in rural areas (99.1 per cent) than in urban areas (98.8 per cent). In the interviewed households, 10,128 eligible women aged 15-49 were identified. Of these, 9,639 were successfully interviewed, yielding a response rate of 95 per cent. In addition, 6,397 children under age five were listed in the household questionnaire. Of these, questionnaires were completed for 6,217 children for a response rate of 97 per cent.
Dates of Data Collection
Data Collection Mode
Data Collection Notes
The field staff (Supervisors and Enumerators) were trained over a period of five days in early September, 1999. The field staff training was preceded by the training of trainers (Master Trainers) that also took five days. After training, field staff were dispatched to conduct the listing exercise that facilitated second stage sampling of households. After sampling, field allocations and dispatching for enumeration was conducted. In each province, two Master Trainers (except Central, Copperbelt and Luapula provinces which had one Master Trainer), four Supervisors (except for Central, Luapula, North-Western, Southern and Western provinces, which had three Supervisors), and approximately twenty enumerators were allocated. The MICS and child labour coordinators provided joint overall supervision. The fieldwork was conducted in October 1999.
The questionnaire for the Zambia MICS was based on the MICS Model Questionnaire with some modifications and additions. The questionnaire was administered in each household. As opposed to the MICS Model Questionnaire, the Zambian MICS used one unified questionnaire the comprised the household, women’s and child questionnaires. Appropriate instructions guided the enumeration process vis-à-vis which section of the questionnaire applied to what category of respondent. In each hous ehold, information was collected on household members including sex, age, literacy, marital status, and orphanhood status. Household level questions also included information on education, household expenditure, household income, labour force, child labour, water and sanitation, and salt iodization modules. The module on child labour was expanded to take into account the needs of the ILO child labour component. The module on education considered all members of the household greater than five years as opposed to the MICS standard of child level questions. In addition to questions at household level, questions were administered in each household for women age 12-49 and children under age five in contrast to the MICS standard of 15-49 years. For children, the questions were administered to the mother or primary caretaker of the child. All modules in the MICS model questionnaire were used for child level questions with the exception of the child mortality module. The optional modules of maternal mortality and child disability were not implemented in the Zambia MICS. Since the Zambian MICS was prepared ahead of the finalization of the MICS model questionnaire, some questions and their responses may not strictly follow the MICS model.
For Eastern, North Western, Luapula and Western provinces, questionnaires were transported to Lusaka for entering the data. In the rest of the provinces, data was entered at provincial level. In order to ensure quality control, all questionnaires were double entered and internal consistency checks were performed (100 per cent verification). Data entry for the survey was done using a software package called Integrated Microcomputer Process System (IMPS). The cleaning of the data was done using the Statistical Application Software (SAS). The data was then converted from SAS to Software Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) format. Data entry began in November 1999 and was completed by January 2000. Production of tables was undertaken using SPSS with MICS programmes
Dataset available free of charge to registered users (www.childinfo.org).
MICS2 has put greater efforts in not only properly documenting the results published in the MICS2 country reports, but also to maximize the use of micro data sets via documentation and dissemination. For those MICS2 countries that granted UNICEF direct access to the micro data sets and documentation, a rigorous process was completed to ensure internal and external consistency, basic standards of data quality, corresponding documentation and, standardization of variable and value labels across countries.
Use of the dataset must be acknowledged using a citation which would include:
- the Identification of the Primary Investigators and the country
- the title of the survey (including acronym and year of implementation)
- the survey reference number
- the source and date of download
Central Statistics Office and Food Security, Health and Nutrition Information System. Zambia Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) 1999. Ref. ZMB_1999_MICS_v01_M. Dataset downloaded from www.childinfo.org on [date]
United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF)
Disclaimer and copyrights
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.
DDI Document ID
Date of Metadata Production
DDI Document version
Version 1.0 - Prepared by IHSN/World Bank Microdata Library