SNAPSHOT OF INDICATORS
Summary of the sample design for PMA2015/Uganda-R2:
PMA2020 uses a two-stage cluster design with residential area (urban vs. rural) and sub-regions as strata. The first stage of sampling was selection of clusters within each sampling stratum using probability proportional to size procedures. Within the 10 sub-regions, clusters were selected proportional to the urban/rural distribution. The sample was designed to generate national estimates of all women modern contraceptive prevalence rate (mCPR) with less than 2% margin of error and urban/rural estimates at less than 3% margin of error.
The table below provides a summary of key family planning indicators at the national level and their breakdown by background characteristics. Disaggregation by administrative unit was done at the region level (Central, Western, Eastern, and Northern) due to small sample sizes when disaggregated by sub-region.
|All Women||Married Women|
|Contraceptive Prevalence Rate (CPR)||28.6||34.9|
|Modern Contraceptive Prevalence (mCPR)||26.1||31.8|
|Traditional Contraceptive Prevalence||2.5||3.1|
|Demand for Family Planning and Fertility Preferences:|
|Unmet need for family planning||21.1||29.9|
|Demand for family planning||49.7||64.8|
|Percent of all/married women with demand satisfied by modern contraception||52.5||49.0|
|Percent of recent births, by intention|
|Wanted no more||14.9||13.1|
|Access, Equity, Quality and Choice:|
|Percent of users who chose their current method by themselves or jointly with a partner/provider||91.3||91.9|
|Percent of users who paid for family planning services||47.2||48.0|
|Method Information Index|
|Percent of current users who were informed about other methods||64.6||67.1|
|Percent of current users who were informed about side effects||59.8||61.7|
|Percent of current users who were told what to do if they experienced side effects||88.6||89.4|
|Percent of current users who would return and/or refer others to their provider||84.6||84.4|
|Percent of women receiving family planning information in the past 12 months||37.2||44.6|
The PMA2015/Uganda-R2 Survey in Detail
Round 1 Sample Design
Survey resources allowed targeting a sample size of 110 enumeration areas (EAs) and a final sample size of 4,840 households. A total of 110 EAs were sampled throughout all 10 sub-regions in Uganda selected by the Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS) master sampling frame, which was representative at the national and sub-regional levels for both urban and rural areas. The primary sampling units for the survey were the EAs, created during the 2002 National Population and Housing Census. The EAs were selected systematically with probability proportional to size with urban/rural stratification in the 10 sub-regions. The rationale was for PMA2020 estimates to be comparable to the most recent national survey estimates. UBOS provided the selection probabilities for the PMA2020 sampled clusters for constructing weights.
In each selected EA, field supervisors randomly selected up to three private service delivery points (SDPs) to be interviewed by a resident enumerator using the SDP questionnaire. The field supervisors themselves administered the SDP questionnaires at an additional three public SDPs that serve each EA; the lowest, second-lowest, and third-lowest level public health SDPs designated to serve each EA.
Round 2 Sample Update
Field supervisors randomly selected 44 households from the original household listing. A household roster was completed and all eligible women age 15-49 in selected households were approached and asked to provide informed consent (and assent if aged 15-17 years) to participate in the study.
The majority of SDPs are repeated in each round, forming a panel survey. If an EA had more than three private SDPs identified during the listing process, then a new sample of the private SDPs is selected during each round.
The household questionnaire gathers basic information about the household, such as ownership of livestock and durable goods, as well as characteristics of the dwelling unit, including wall, floor and roof materials, water sources, and sanitation facilities. This information is used to construct a wealth quintile index.
The first section of the household questionnaire, the household roster, lists basic demographic information about all usual members of the household and visitors who stayed with the household the night before the interview. This roster is used to identify eligible respondents for the female questionnaire. In addition to the roster, the household questionnaire also gathers data that are used to measure key water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) indicators, including regular sources and uses of water, sanitation facilities used and prevalence of open defecation by household members.
The female questionnaire is used to collect information from all women age 15 to 49 who were listed on the household roster at selected households. The female questionnaire gathers specific information on: education; fertility and fertility preferences; family planning access, choice and use; quality of family planning services; exposure to family planning messaging in the media; and the burden of collecting water on women.
The SDP questionnaire collected information about the provision and quality of reproductive health services and products, integration of health services, and WASH within the SDP.
Training, Data Collection and Processing
As this was a refresher training for continuing staff the training focused on a handful of newly added questions to the household questionnaire and review of the service delivery point (SDP) questionnaire and review of survey content and protocol. The PMA2020/Uganda project was unable to carry out the facility-based survey (SDP) during the first round of data collection and therefore the team spent a considerable amount of time during the Round 2 refresher training going over the SDP questionnaire.
Throughout the training, REs and supervisors were evaluated based on their performance on phone-based assessments, practical field exercises for the SDP survey and class participation. The training included a half-day of practical exercises, during which participants entered a practice enumeration area (EA) to conduct SDP interviews. The training was conducted primarily in English, but some small group review sessions were conducted in all of the seven local languages.
Supervisors received additional training prior to and after the RE training to further strengthen their supervision skills, including instruction on conducting re-interviews, carrying out random spot checks, and dealing with the local/community leaders and engaging the communities.
Data Collection and Processing
Once all data were on the server, data analysts cleaned and de-identified the data, applied survey weights, and prepared the final data set for analysis using Stata® version 12 software. Data analysis for the national dissemination of preliminary findings was conducted between February and July 2015. The national dissemination workshop of preliminary results was held on July 22, 2015 at Serena Hotel, Kampala, Uganda.
In the occupied households that provided an interview, a total of 3,811 eligible women age 15 to 49 years were identified. Overall, 95.3% of the eligible women were available and consented to the interview. The female response rate was higher in the rural (96.5%) relative to the urban (92.1%) EAs. Only de facto females are included in the PMA analyses; the final completed de facto female sample size was 3,631 (unweighted).
The final service delivery point (SDP) sample included 369 facility interviews, of which 360 were completed, for a response rate of 97.6%.
Weights were adjusted for non-response at the household and individual levels and applied to all household and individual estimates in this report. SDP estimates are not weighted.
|Household response rate* (%)||87.4||95.9||93.5|
|Interviews with women age 15-49|
|Number of eligible women**||1,054||2,757||3,811|
|Number of eligible women interviewed||971||2,660||3,631|
|Eligible women response rate† (%)||92.1||96.5||95.3|
Sample Error Estimates
Makerere University, School of Public Health at the College of Health Sciences and The Bill & Melinda Gates Institute for Population and Reproductive Health at The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Performance Monitoring and Accountability 2020 (PMA2020) Survey Round 2, PMA2015/Uganda-R2 Snapshot of Indicators. 2015. Uganda and Baltimore, Maryland, USA.